4 ms·

What is next: a restaurant without Asians? or without gays? or without Muslims? or without senior people? There are plenty of other restaurants that would acce

by jusob 15y ago

What is next: a restaurant without Asians? or without gays? or without Muslims? or without senior people? There are plenty of other restaurants that would accept them, I don't see why they would complain if just a few refused them. Or maybe a restaurant that would not accept just you!

gte910h 15y ago
While that certainly is a direction that things could go if you took this to an absurd level, places can already ban kids buy doing lots of things related to alcohol and smoking in many jurisdictions. Doing it outright doesn't really change much other than the liquor license requirement. Not to mention: This isn't a ban on children, merely children under 6.
wccrawford 15y ago
That is indeed the problem. It is perfectly legal and acceptable to throw someone out if they or their party are being disruptive. Banning them simply on some artificial criteria is a bad idea.
- MatthewPhillips 15y ago
  "Being disruptive" is not a firm rule though. It looks really bad when someone gets thrown out of a restaurant. It's assumed what they did goes above and beyond what is the norm. It also makes everyone in the restaurant feel uneasy, which hurts on repeat visits. It's better to have a firm rule so that everyone who does go to the restaurant feels confident that they'll have an enjoyable visit.
  - wccrawford 15y ago
    I think if you posted a notice that said "All disruptive customers will be removed from the premises. This include children." that most people would approve of it. A few people with noisy kids would object, but that's who you're trying to get rid of in the first place. You would have to actually enforce the rule, and that would be ugly, but it would have been way, way less ugly than what's happening right now. And it would have been just as good for publicity, if you advertised it.
MatthewPhillips 15y ago
Actually I think a restaurant should be able to do this. They would be tying their own noose, which is the way it should be.
- pavel_lishin 15y ago
  Not everywhere. You think that a restaurant in, say, Princeton, Texas (a small podunk town where I grew up) that refused entry to Muslims would lose business? I'm pretty sure people would show up and order a bowl of grits and a coffee just to have a hearty laugh at minorities before heading off to work.
  - MatthewPhillips 15y ago
    So the Muslim doesn't contribute to the Princeton, TX economy. They go on Facebook and tell all of their friends about it, and it spreads outward. Pressure is not just on the restaurant to look like racists, but anyone who goes there, knowing that they'll be labeled as complicit. Maybe it's not enough, and Princeton, TX is just a backwards isolationist town that doesn't want to participate in civilized society. They can choose that, if they want, and inbreed themselves into extinction.
    - pavel_lishin 15y ago
      But not everyone in Princeton is complicit. The 12-year-old me is now fucked, because the town I live in becomes a shithole.
bartonfink 15y ago
Unless I'm mistaken, children aren't a protected class in the U.S. in the same way that Asians, gays and Muslims are, so legally there's nothing stopping this. Children that young (under the age of 6 is what the article specifies) frequently can't behave appropriately in public, and this deprives other paying customers of the experience they're paying for. If a gay Asian Muslim started grabbing men or practicing martial arts in the middle of the restaurant, he'd be asked to leave as well for the same reason.
- wccrawford 15y ago
  The difference is that they'd be asked to leave -after- they've caused the problem. This is causing a lot of collateral damage to innocents.
- tzs 15y ago
  Gays aren't a protected class in the US.
brianto2010 15y ago
Do restaurant owners recieve complaints about Asians? Gays? Muslims? Do restaurant owners recieve those complaints at the level that they do about young children? Are those complaints justified as they are in this case?
tomjen3 15y ago
Why not? I can ban people from my apartment for any reason I choose, why should I not be able to do so for my business (if I had one)?
tluyben2 15y ago
Yeah because that's the same. Young children are often an annoyance for people who want some silence or don't have them themselves. Not a 'I don't like the color of your skin' annoyance, but a 'I still can hear them scream hours after actually hearing them' annoyance. I cannot hear myself think annoyance. And that's fine, if you are parents or if you like that kind of thing, then that's great. I don't mind it often, but sometimes I do mind it and then it would be great to have the choice to go to a bar, restaurant, hotel, whatever, where there are no young children. I don't see how this is the same as discrimination against Asians etc; they never (actually 0 times and I go to Asian restaurants a lot) screamed in my ear, ran around throwing Coke all over me (luxury restaurant that happened in) etc. I see your comparison more in a quite different light which I often encounter; if you let kids in, why not dogs? My dogs don't bark, whine, poop, pee on the floor, don't run around, don't break things, don't bite things, don't beg for food (or icecream) really loudly; something which I have seen young children all do (yep including the barking, seriously) in public places, including airlines and restaurants.

by jusob 15y ago

gte910h 15y ago

While that certainly is a direction that things could go if you took this to an absurd level, places can already ban kids buy doing lots of things related to alcohol and smoking in many jurisdictions. Doing it outright doesn't really change much other than the liquor license requirement. Not to mention: This isn't a ban on children, merely children under 6.

wccrawford 15y ago

That is indeed the problem. It is perfectly legal and acceptable to throw someone out if they or their party are being disruptive. Banning them simply on some artificial criteria is a bad idea.

MatthewPhillips 15y ago
"Being disruptive" is not a firm rule though. It looks really bad when someone gets thrown out of a restaurant. It's assumed what they did goes above and beyond what is the norm. It also makes everyone in the restaurant feel uneasy, which hurts on repeat visits. It's better to have a firm rule so that everyone who does go to the restaurant feels confident that they'll have an enjoyable visit.
- wccrawford 15y ago
  I think if you posted a notice that said "All disruptive customers will be removed from the premises. This include children." that most people would approve of it. A few people with noisy kids would object, but that's who you're trying to get rid of in the first place. You would have to actually enforce the rule, and that would be ugly, but it would have been way, way less ugly than what's happening right now. And it would have been just as good for publicity, if you advertised it.

MatthewPhillips 15y ago

Actually I think a restaurant should be able to do this. They would be tying their own noose, which is the way it should be.

pavel_lishin 15y ago
Not everywhere. You think that a restaurant in, say, Princeton, Texas (a small podunk town where I grew up) that refused entry to Muslims would lose business? I'm pretty sure people would show up and order a bowl of grits and a coffee just to have a hearty laugh at minorities before heading off to work.
- MatthewPhillips 15y ago
  So the Muslim doesn't contribute to the Princeton, TX economy. They go on Facebook and tell all of their friends about it, and it spreads outward. Pressure is not just on the restaurant to look like racists, but anyone who goes there, knowing that they'll be labeled as complicit. Maybe it's not enough, and Princeton, TX is just a backwards isolationist town that doesn't want to participate in civilized society. They can choose that, if they want, and inbreed themselves into extinction.
  - pavel_lishin 15y ago
    But not everyone in Princeton is complicit. The 12-year-old me is now fucked, because the town I live in becomes a shithole.

bartonfink 15y ago

Unless I'm mistaken, children aren't a protected class in the U.S. in the same way that Asians, gays and Muslims are, so legally there's nothing stopping this. Children that young (under the age of 6 is what the article specifies) frequently can't behave appropriately in public, and this deprives other paying customers of the experience they're paying for. If a gay Asian Muslim started grabbing men or practicing martial arts in the middle of the restaurant, he'd be asked to leave as well for the same reason.

wccrawford 15y ago
The difference is that they'd be asked to leave -after- they've caused the problem. This is causing a lot of collateral damage to innocents.
tzs 15y ago
Gays aren't a protected class in the US.

brianto2010 15y ago

Do restaurant owners recieve complaints about Asians? Gays? Muslims? Do restaurant owners recieve those complaints at the level that they do about young children? Are those complaints justified as they are in this case?

tomjen3 15y ago

Why not? I can ban people from my apartment for any reason I choose, why should I not be able to do so for my business (if I had one)?

tluyben2 15y ago

Yeah because that's the same. Young children are often an annoyance for people who want some silence or don't have them themselves. Not a 'I don't like the color of your skin' annoyance, but a 'I still can hear them scream hours after actually hearing them' annoyance. I cannot hear myself think annoyance. And that's fine, if you are parents or if you like that kind of thing, then that's great. I don't mind it often, but sometimes I do mind it and then it would be great to have the choice to go to a bar, restaurant, hotel, whatever, where there are no young children. I don't see how this is the same as discrimination against Asians etc; they never (actually 0 times and I go to Asian restaurants a lot) screamed in my ear, ran around throwing Coke all over me (luxury restaurant that happened in) etc. I see your comparison more in a quite different light which I often encounter; if you let kids in, why not dogs? My dogs don't bark, whine, poop, pee on the floor, don't run around, don't break things, don't bite things, don't beg for food (or icecream) really loudly; something which I have seen young children all do (yep including the barking, seriously) in public places, including airlines and restaurants.