Is this nightclub being sexist

Hollister11

Recently a nightclub was doing a 'ladies night' theme. All girls got into the nightclub for free, but lads had to pay €5 for admission.

Is this not sexist? How can this nightclub be allowed discriminate based on gender. Imagine they had a white people night, or male night, there would be uproar.

__Alex__

Businesses do this for commercial reasons, nothing else. If women are allowed in for free, the men will arrive, money in hand. It must bring in more money than just charging everyone. It's a model that seems tried and true. Ladies nights are as old as the hills, predating third wave feminism and probably the earlier waves too. Businesses don't care about gender politics, they only care about their bottom line.

Another thing to note is, they're not excluding anyone.

iptba

__Alex__ wrote: »

Businesses do this for commercial reasons, nothing else. If women are allowed in for free, the men will arrive, money in hand. It must bring in more money than just charging everyone. It's a model that seems tried and true. Ladies nights are as old as the hills, predating third wave feminism and probably the earlier waves too. Businesses don't care about gender politics, they only care about their bottom line.

Another thing to note is, they're not excluding anyone.

If businesses believed charging more to travellers (say) helped their business, would that be okay?

__Alex__

iptba wrote: »

If businesses believed charging more to travellers (say) helped their business, would that be okay?

Can you see many people objecting to your example?

Seriously, lads, pick your battles. The reason ladies' nights happen is because they work.

Tigger

iptba wrote: »

If businesses believed charging more to travellers (say) helped their business, would that be okay?

i think it a discount rather than an extra charge
also i've always thought that getting loads of women into the lubs wa a posititivde

iptba

Tigger wrote: »

If businesses believed charging more to travellers (say) helped their business, would that be okay?

i think it a discount rather than an extra charge

OK, free for settled people, charge for travellers.

endacl

No. It was dopist. It discriminated against dopes who are prepared to pay for the privilege of paying for overpriced drinks and listen to bad music.

__Alex__

endacl wrote: »

No. It was dopist. It discriminated against dopes who are prepared to pay for the privilege of paying for overpriced drinks and listen to bad music.

Exactly, it's a muppet tax! Or a blue-ball tax. Go somewhere decent instead where there is no charge!

Tigger

iptba wrote: »

OK, free for settled people, charge for travellers.

thats not a business model
also how do you definiate the travellers
i look like a traveller talk differen
so do they ask me to talk or just assume i'm a traveller?

venlo

the only good party is a free party

Tigger

venlo wrote: »

the only good party is a free party

The only good party had loads of women who were attracted to the free in prices
They probably also think they can g t bought drinks so they might be able to go out on te cheap
I don't care I don't buy drinks when I'm m on the pull and I like clubs with loads of women
I a happy wouldn't go to a club with no women in it if I was on the pull

venlo

Tigger wrote: »

The only good party had loads of women who were attracted to the free in prices
They probably also think they can g t bought drinks so they might be able to go out on te cheap
I don't care I don't buy drinks when I'm m on the pull and I like clubs with loads of women
I a happy wouldn't go to a club with no women in it if I was on the pull

your barred

H3llR4iser

It's an age old model/technique to get as many women as possible in a bar/club; It's widespread more or less in the entire western world and it's nothing new - it was already done 17-18 years ago when I occasionally did security in clubs to earn some "poor student money" (at the time and in the coutnry I was, the industry had no regulation...if you were a big fella, you'd "be grand").

The basic idea, as many mentioned, is that getting women in for free or a very low charge, will get guys queuing at the entrance cash in hand - and it works. Have one Saturday night turn into a "sausage fest", and you'd be surprised how fast the "word" travels - and how much reduction in business it can cause over the next few week ends...

silverharp

Having watched the movie Wargames with junior last night the computer summed it up well "A strange game,The only winning move is not to play."

Mr.H

Of course it's sexist don't give me the whole "tried and tested business model" crap. If it was challenged legally it would be shut down straight away.

The problem is it is sexist against men and no-one cares.

If it was free for white people and black people had to pay then it would be racist. Even if it was tried and tested.

They only allowed white men into golf clubs because women and black people would bring down the prestige. It was a proven business model that worked and was discriminatory.

The issue is that when sexism occurs against men it doesn't exist because you'll have people that are talking rubbish saying "ah sure will you leave it alone"

__Alex__

Mr.H wrote: »

If it was free for white people and black people had to pay then it would be racist. Even if it was tried and tested.

What would be the commercial reason for this?

I'm guessing all the menfolk who flock to these establishments on ladies' nights don't consider it sexist. And they are not being excluded from these establishments either, so it's not the same thing as a place that actively doesn't allow people of one gender or race. Far from being excluded, this is designed to increase business and bring more people of both genders in. As someone said above, a place perceived as a sausage fest can lose business fast.

_Whimsical_

Mr.H wrote: »

Of course it's sexist don't give me the whole "tried and tested business model" crap. If it was challenged legally it would be shut down straight away.

The problem is it is sexist against men and no-one cares.

If it was free for white people and black people had to pay then it would be racist. Even if it was tried and tested.

They only allowed white men into golf clubs because women and black people would bring down the prestige. It was a proven business model that worked and was discriminatory.

The issue is that when sexism occurs against men it doesn't exist because you'll have people that are talking rubbish saying "ah sure will you leave it alone"

It exists as much as anything for the entertainment of men. Ladies nights are generally held on nights when less women come to a particular place. More women out for the night attracts more men because those men want to be in the company of women. It's a win win situation really. If men felt victimised by it they'd stay at home I imagine.

Gavinz

Hollister11 wrote: »

Recently a nightclub was doing a 'ladies night' theme. All girls got into the nightclub for free, but lads had to pay €5 for admission.

Is this not sexist? How can this nightclub be allowed discriminate based on gender. Imagine they had a white people night, or male night, there would be uproar.

Possibly. But why do you give a fcuk?

johnnyskeleton

Paying into clubs is so celtic tiger!

Kimbot

No discrimination, sure if that's discrimination then student nights etc would be too

__Alex__

_Whimsical_ wrote: »

It exists as much as anything for the entertainment of men. Ladies nights are generally held on nights when less women come to a particular place. More women out for the night attracts more men because those men want to be in the company of women. It's a win win situation really. If men felt victimised by it they'd stay at home I imagine.

Bingo.

Lemming

I can't really see this becoming a poster child for male inequality any time ever lads. Whilst it's annoying, at the end of the day you do not need to enter a nite-club. Being made to pay or turned away from such an establishment on any given night is not going to negatively impact your life in any meaningful manner. If the matter of paying in whilst women go free was really a genuine issue, you wouldn't be going in the first place; or else your priorities are all messed up.

A burning issue and rallying cry to arms for oppressed men everywhere it is not.

ancapailldorcha

Lemming wrote: »

I can't really see this becoming a poster child for male inequality any time ever lads. Whilst it's annoying, at the end of the day you do not need to enter a nite-club. Being made to pay or turned away from such an establishment on any given night is not going to negatively impact your life in any meaningful manner. A burning issue and rallying cry to arms for oppressed men everywhere it is not.

Nightclubs seem to be very much on the way out and most people don't bother with them at all once they reach a certain age.

Lemming

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

Nightclubs seem to be very much on the way out and most people don't bother with them at all once they reach a certain age.

I've only ever - since about the age of 20 bothered with niteclubs if friends were insistent on going. Much preferred late bars & music venues. Then again, it helps divorcing yourself of the foolish perceived notion of thinking you need to go to clubs if you're not particularly partial to dance & pop music in the first place.

To quote Steel Panther:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yfB7vF7nCdA

edit: Please don't play this in work ... :pac: *ahem*

ancapailldorcha

I do try to drag friends to them on occasion but I've only tried this a few times in the past 6 years or so. It's almost like I need reminding how terrible they are.

Regarding the sexism thing, it's just too minor and it's something that's been happening for decades.

Mr.H

jonnycivic wrote:

No discrimination, sure if that's discrimination then student nights etc would be too

They are. It is discrimination to only allow students in bars that are not on campus bars.

Don't get me wrong I don't go to these clubs or student places so it doesn't affect me.

But it is very much discrimination.

If you treat someone a certain way because of their gender or color of skin etc it is discrimination

__Alex__ wrote:

I'm guessing all the menfolk who flock to these establishments on ladies' nights don't consider it sexist. And they are not being excluded from these establishments either, so it's not the same thing as a place that actively doesn't allow people of one gender or race. Far from being excluded, this is designed to increase business and bring more people of both genders in. As someone said above, a place perceived as a sausage fest can lose business fast.

Exclusion is not the issue.

Treating one person different from another based on there gender is.

It's open to a lot of variables such as transgender or just cross dressers

__Alex__ wrote:

What would be the commercial reason for this?

I don't know what commercial reason there would be to charge black people for the company of white people. Just an example

__Alex__

Lemming wrote: »

I can't really see this becoming a poster child for male inequality any time ever lads. Whilst it's annoying, at the end of the day you do not need to enter a nite-club. Being made to pay or turned away from such an establishment on any given night is not going to negatively impact your life in any meaningful manner. If the matter of paying in whilst women go free was really a genuine issue, you wouldn't be going in the first place; or else your priorities are all messed up.

A burning issue and rallying cry to arms for oppressed men everywhere it is not.

Especially as the idea is to bring men in, not exclude them.

Lemming

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

I do try to drag friends to them on occasion but I've only tried this a few times in the past 6 years or so. It's almost like I need reminding how terrible they are.

"I go to dance clubs 'bout once a year, just to justify the other three hundred and sixty-four days of the year I spend in my apartment going; 'God, what f*cking idiots!'".
- Bill Hicks

__Alex__

Mr.H wrote: »

Exclusion is not the issue.

Treating one person different from another based on there gender is.

Exclusion is very much at the heart of discrimination. Whereas here, they are taking advantage of the notion that a lot of lads are looking to get their hole on a night out. If you build it, they will come, so to speak. That might be a generalisation on their part but my hunch is that the generalisation translates into increased profit for them. That's all there is to this, really.

Of course, many place don't charge anyone anymore, but some heads will be turned by the "ladies go for free" thing, of both genders.

Mr.H

__Alex__ wrote: »

Exclusion is very much at the heart of discrimination. Whereas here, they are taking advantage of the notion that a lot of lads are looking to get their hole on a night out. If you build it, they will come, so to speak. That might be a generalisation on their part but my hunch is that the generalisation translates into increased profit for them. That's all there is to this, really.

Of course, many place don't charge anyone anymore, but some heads will be turned by the "ladies go for free" thing, of both genders.

Discrimination - the unjust or prejudicial treatment of different categories of people, especially on the grounds of race, age, or sex.

Would you not say it is a prejudicial treatment of people (in this case horny young lads) who are lured by hope?

I know a couple of places that dont charge lads before midnight for example but I still think its a little unethical to be allowed to discriminate.

If there was a similar situation that charged women but not men do you think it would be allowed?

__Alex__

Mr.H wrote: »

Discrimination - the unjust or prejudicial treatment of different categories of people, especially on the grounds of race, age, or sex.

Been on Google, I see.

Mr.H wrote: »

Would you not say it is a prejudicial treatment of people (in this case horny young lads) who are lured by hope?

Oh for the love of jaysus.

If there was a similar situation that charged women but not men do you think it would be allowed?

Dunno, it's unlikely to ever come up. There's a reason for that.

kieranfitz

If it prevent the usual sausage fest that is an Irish nightclub then let them carry on.

Wibbs

Hollister11 wrote: »

Is this not sexist?

No. /thread. Unless we're all drinking from the same poisoned well as purpled haired Tumblr "feminists". Sod that.

Rekop dog

This gentleman's club is obsessed with sexism and gender equality, like every 2nd thread. Could be mistaken for ladies lounge with the amount of whinging and feeble posts.

__Alex__

Wibbs wrote: »

No. /thread. Unless we're all drinking from the same poisoned well as purpled haired Tumblr "feminists". Sod that.

Yes!!! This is it!

My own stance is that I don't have a problem with any business that just allows one gender. I had no problem with the men-only golf clubs. I think single gender gyms can be a good thing. Personally I go to a mixed gym and it doesn't bother me but I know that a lot of people would rather just work out in the presence of their own gender, especially if they are just starting out and are a bit self-conscious. If single-gender gyms got more people exercising, then they would be a very good thing. I can't think of any other places that used to be exclusionary to one gender but I'm all ears.

So to be bothered by 'ladies go for free' nights is allowing yourself to be dragged down to the level of the type of feminists who would protest those men-only golf clubs and men-only gyms. Is that really what you want, OP? That's what I mean by picking your battles. Don't dilute the focus on the really important issues facing men today.

Rekop dog wrote: »

This gentleman's club is obsessed with sexism and gender equality, like every 2nd thread. Could be mistaken for ladies lounge with the amount of whinging and feeble posts.

For the last long while, there's been very little of that on tLL.

TheChizler

I think it's very obvious why they do it. I also agree that not many people really care. I don't think those two points address the OP at all.

Legally I do think it's against the law, even though it's designed to bring more men in they are at a disadvantage as they have to pay more. The business having a commercial reason doesn't change that. The recentish ruling that insurance companies can't charge differently based on gender would be similar enough in my mind.

Maguined

Wibbs wrote: »

No. /thread. Unless we're all drinking from the same poisoned well as purpled haired Tumblr "feminists". Sod that.

It is sexist it is just so low on the scale we don't really care as it does not hurt anyone just the same as nearly everyone agrees illegally streaming movies/TV is technically stealing but no one cares as it is stealing from huge billion dollar industries.

silverharp

It shows that equality is not an appropriate catch as men and women aren't equal they are different. Now for sh1ts and giggles and to use the absurdity against itself it would be funny if a case was brought and won.
the nightclub business is different to say going to a concert or going out for a meal. On average men spend more in a night club, they will drink more and they will buy drinks for women so its in the interests of the clubs to ensure there are lots of women there to keep the men spending.
They are a huge waste of time and money for men and not a great way to meet women. I'd imagine they peaked in popularity a decade or more ago? best advice would be to avoid them

B0jangles

Rekop dog wrote: »

This gentleman's club is obsessed with sexism and gender equality, like every 2nd thread. Could be mistaken for ladies lounge with the amount of whinging and feeble posts.

Just going to drop this here...

silverharp

B0jangles wrote: »

Just going to drop this here...

how many posts/users are in either forum? you will need to "drop this here" too to make a basic evaluation

B0jangles

silverharp wrote: »

how many posts/users are in either forum? you will need to "drop this here" too to make a basic evaluation

No need to get grumpy, I just thought it was quite funny that the Gentleman's Club apparently talks about feminism more than the Ladies Lounge does, that's all

GLaDOS

218,823 total posts in TGC

459,955 total posts in TLL

So almost half as many posts, and yet feminism is still mentioned more :pac:

silverharp

B0jangles wrote: »

No need to get grumpy, I just thought it was quite funny that the Gentleman's Club apparently talks about feminism more than the Ladies Lounge does, that's all

not grumpy but if there are twice as many users in tgc (and Ive no clue), then "we" don't.

but even if its true, I'd say its to be expected because its easier for the men to see the downside either for themselves directly or for other men.

SarahMollie

silverharp wrote: »

not grumpy but if there are twice as many users in tgc (and Ive no clue), then "we" don't.

but even if its true, I'd say its to be expected because its easier for the men to see the downside either for themselves directly or for other men.

From reading both forums for the past few months, I find that there are many more threads claiming that men are being disadvantaged in TGC than counter claims in TLL.

Threads like this actually make me a bit sad because it just smacks of people looking for reasons/excuses to be disgruntled rather than just going out in the world and making their own luck.

Life is sometimes unfair. Sometimes though, you just have to put your big girl/boy pants on and get on with it. As Alex said, pick your battles - and be thankful that your standard blue razor is typically cheaper than its pink equivalent.

iptba

Women have all sorts of groups, initiatives and bodies fighting for them; not nearly as much interest in fighting for men.

ancapailldorcha

SarahMollie wrote: »

From reading both forums for the past few months, I find that there are many more threads claiming that men are being disadvantaged in TGC than counter claims in TLL.

Threads like this actually make me a bit sad because it just smacks of people looking for reasons/excuses to be disgruntled rather than just going out in the world and making their own luck.

Life is sometimes unfair. Sometimes though, you just have to put your big girl/boy pants on and get on with it. As Alex said, pick your battles - and be thankful that your standard blue razor is typically cheaper than its pink equivalent.

Indeed. I remember taking a look at the forum not too long ago and seeing the standard 2 threads; Men's Rights and Sexism. Most topics on those subjects could be neatly inserted into either of those.

It's a topic I spent a fair bit of time discussing but eventually got tired of. I'm just not seeing it as I used to and a lot of it seems a little bit petty.

silverharp

SarahMollie wrote: »

From reading both forums for the past few months, I find that there are many more threads claiming that men are being disadvantaged in TGC than counter claims in TLL.

Threads like this actually make me a bit sad because it just smacks of people looking for reasons/excuses to be disgruntled rather than just going out in the world and making their own luck.

Life is sometimes unfair. Sometimes though, you just have to put your big girl/boy pants on and get on with it. As Alex said, pick your battles - and be thankful that your standard blue razor is typically cheaper than its pink equivalent.

its a discussion forum , there are always new people posting or maybe just started looking into the issue. Plus I sure someone picked up some information on "Nightclub economics" and marketing.
as for razors? what? they are different products , that is one of the silly feminist talking points of imagined patriarchal oppression

ancapailldorcha

silverharp wrote: »

its a discussion forum , there are always new people posting or maybe just started looking into the issue. Plus I sure someone picked up some information on "Nightclub economics" and marketing.
as for razors? what? they are different products , that is one of the silly feminist talking points of imagined patriarchal oppression

Women's razors are taxed as luxury items IIRC whereas men's aren't. It's called the "Pink tax".

silverharp

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

Women's razors are taxed as luxury items IIRC whereas men's aren't. It's called the "Pink tax".

there seems to be VAT charged on men's razors in Ireland, UK might be different

SarahMollie

silverharp wrote: »

its a discussion forum , there are always new people posting or maybe just started looking into the issue. Plus I sure someone picked up some information on "Nightclub economics" and marketing.

Its often the same posters over and over again. Its depressing, but I'm heartened by the fact that I don't see these attitudes with the same regularity in real life as I do in TGC.

silverharp wrote: »

as for razors? what? they are different products , that is one of the silly feminist talking points of imagined patriarchal oppression

They are fundamentally the same product but marketed and packaged differently. I know this not only because I studded marketing and work in the field, but also because I buy mens razors because they're cheaper and do the same job. I use my OH's shaving foam too - smells different obviously (the smell is not important to its effectiveness, and is therefore branding rather than core to the product)

Its a commercial decision to make something pink and charge more because you know the packaging will attract certain women. I'm not actually saying this is right or wrong, simply acknowledging that some clever marketeer notices this and used the information to increase profits. You could argue that women are complicit because they buy these products and accept the price differential.

Both genders occasionally have to suck it up (and pay into the nightclub/pay extra for pink products) or decide not to partake (go into a different bar/just buy the cheapest razors).

If that makes me a feminist, then cool, I'm not afraid of the label.

TheChizler

silverharp wrote: »

there seems to be VAT charged on men's razors in Ireland, UK might be different

Nothing stopping either gender buying either razor; only when the distinction is imposed on them it becomes an, albeit minor, issue.