3 ms·

> ...within its rights to refuse service for businesses that are unsavory... - Labor union organizers and socialists used to be considered unsavory. - The civ

> ...within its rights to refuse service for businesses that are unsavory... - Labor union organizers and socialists used to be considered unsavory. - The civil rights movement used to be considered unsavory. - LGBTQ people used to be considered really unsavory, pre-1970s. Guess we know what the parent poster and those that agree with them would have said about businesses refusing service to those movements had they been around then.

tomrod 4y ago
Your point, even though it is US-centric whataboutism, is quite correct. A private venue that operates as a host has rights to discriminate among whom it hosts. Even more so, "unsavory" here is clearly a placeholder for "legally questionable if not outright banned" rather than "social underdog some people in society feel superior to." Trolls farms are typically anything but social underdogs. But let's step into your oranges-compared-to-apples example set. What your reductionist, presentist whataboutism misses is that the social "unsavoriness" was eventually seen to be unethical by society writ-large. However, KiwiFarms, as a vehicle for harassment against the ideal American underdogs, hasn't a leg to stand on and will remain as socially (and legally) unsavory. Therefore, your conclusion, that the OP and those that agree would have refused service universally to Labor, Civil Rights activists and supporters, and LGBTQ, is flawed. Perhaps ironically, the OP and those that agree with the comments are contained in the union of the latter two categories anyhow.