|
Javid posted:I'd be more interested to see a theater get sued for their "no outside food" policy by somebody who's, I dunno, hypoglycemic or something where they medically have to have A) food B) food that meets specific nutritional criteria on hand (ie not popcorn or candy) at all times. I'm guessing this hasn't actually happened because just sneaking it in is easier. If you're hypoglycemic, candy and soda is actually exactly what you need... That said, I can't think of a medical condition off the top of my head that both allows you a normal enough routine to go to the movies, but still requires you to eat specific foods (not medications) less than every two hours. I'm sure if you were that special a snowflake, and had a doctor's note, they'd let you do what you needed to do.
|
#
?
May 27, 2017 07:49
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 9, 2024 08:40 |
|
|
Marfan lipodystrophy syndrome is the closest I can think of, but it’s questionable for several reasons. Sufferers (and they are few) definitely do have to eat food, every fifteen minutes, and if they can be motivational speakers, they can probably see a film. It may be possible to subsist on popcorn and soda pop, but I wouldn’t question it.
|
|
#
?
May 27, 2017 08:01
|
|
|
 Darn you, ladies night at the bar!One of my local gun ranges charges half off for ladies, kids are free on a 1:1 ratio with adults. Clearly, my equal protection is being violated. Potato Salad fucked around with this message at 13:00 on May 27, 2017 |
|
#
?
May 27, 2017 12:58
|
|
|
vyelkin posted:If this is the case then couldn't the theatre make an argument that they had some reason to believe the MRA guy would violate women's privacy during the movie and so they were justified in holding women-only showings? I doubt that would work. When people work out, they often don't want members of the opposite sex to see their fat guts flapping around. That's not a concern at movie theaters. Additionally, a movie theater is a public accommodation while a gym is (typically) a private club.
|
|
#
?
May 27, 2017 14:10
|
|
|
Special prices for kids is ageist!!
|
|
#
?
May 27, 2017 15:12
|
|
|
Javid posted:I'd be more interested to see a theater get sued for their "no outside food" policy by somebody who's, I dunno, hypoglycemic or something where they medically have to have A) food B) food that meets specific nutritional criteria on hand (ie not popcorn or candy) at all times. I'm guessing this hasn't actually happened because just sneaking it in is easier. They don't have a problem with people bringing in medication. "I can get hypoglycemic" is going to let you bring in as many glucose tablets or gels or liquids as you want. If a theatre actually enforced that policy and someone died, or suffered any kind of harm, because of it it the possible loss is too big to risk on a few bucks of concessions.
|
|
#
?
May 27, 2017 20:23
|
|
|
Potato Salad posted:
This is a really stupid comparison. Obviously this isn't anything people should get upset over but it would be interesting to hear openargs take on it instead of the know - nothing garbage - tier arguments being made by pretty much everyone but twodot.
|
|
#
?
May 28, 2017 00:54
|
|
|
Ha, oh poo poo. Okay guy, you or Twoot or whoever he is may now begin citing case law that indicates this passes muster as illegal discrimination.
|
|
#
?
May 28, 2017 00:58
|
|
|
Potato Salad posted:Ha, oh poo poo. Okay guy, you or Twoot or whoever he is may now begin citing case law that indicates this passes muster as illegal discrimination. edit: I've seen reasonable arguments that there's effectively no damages for a civil suit, or that no judge would ever care to hear this case, but not that their actions don't violate the text of the law. twodot fucked around with this message at 01:10 on May 28, 2017 |
|
#
?
May 28, 2017 01:05
|
|
|
Potato Salad posted:Ha, oh poo poo. Okay guy, you or Twoot or whoever he is may now begin citing case law that indicates this passes muster as illegal discrimination. Gee, yer onner, I told that boy that we could give him his hamburger round the back. Obviously him sittin up at the counter with my respectable customers would cause a scene. How can he claim damages and allege harm if I was happy to serve him a burger just like anybody else? We all know he was just lookin to cause trouble anyway. That's what TROIKA means by garbage-tier arguments. The useful posts have been the ones that pointed out the Civil Rights Act, which revealed that women-only screenings are not illegal federally since Title II does not say anything about sex, and the one that pointed out the local law that does seem to make a female-only screening illegal. And absolutely if you brought this before a judge in Texas, there is some chance you'd get injunctive relief stopping the screenings based on that law. I have no idea if that chance is 1%, 50%, or 99% because I'm not a lawyer and I don't know what the judges are like down in Texas. We all like dunking on MRAs, but we should probably stick to calling them whiny little shits blubbering about a movie they only want to watch so they can bitch about it on Reddit. I posted in this thread because it's usually reasonably informative and I hoped to learn about US law.
|
|
#
?
May 28, 2017 01:55
|
|
|
Javid posted:I'd be more interested to see a theater get sued for their "no outside food" policy by somebody who's, I dunno, hypoglycemic or something where they medically have to have A) food B) food that meets specific nutritional criteria on hand (ie not popcorn or candy) at all times. I'm guessing this hasn't actually happened because just sneaking it in is easier. There's probably a ADA claim there. Getting to bring in your glucose gel packets is probably a reasonable accommodation. On the other hand, I can't imagine any movie theater actually objecting to it. e: or if one of their minimum wage 17 year old employees did, immediately apologizing profusely.
|
|
#
?
May 28, 2017 03:29
|
|
|
twodot posted:Is the legality of this in dispute? I quoted the relevant ordinance. I don't think anyone should care whether this is legal, like jaywalking or whatever, but the law seems unambiguous here. You can still obtain the "goods and services" in question if you're a guy. You just can't get into that specific theater at that specific time. The difference here would be if men could only see Wonder Woman there in the terrible theater room where live skunks wander up and down the aisle (not the same service), or if men weren't allowed to buy Wonder Woman tickets there at all.
|
|
#
?
May 28, 2017 10:05
|
|
|
De minimis non curat lex
|
|
#
?
May 28, 2017 12:15
|
|
|
Hot take: public accommodations statutes in some states are really broadly worded and ladies night might conflict with them, but holy poo poo who cares chill.
|
|
#
?
May 28, 2017 12:28
|
|
|
Roadie posted:You can still obtain the "goods and services" in question if you're a guy. You just can't get into that specific theater at that specific time. And under many laws or ordinances, including those for the specific area in question, that's not allowed. Yes, a man can get into every other theater except that one, but segregation is illegal and most anti-segregation laws and ordinances don't have an "unless the segregated accommodations are really equal" exception. It's fair to say that having a women's-only screening isn't malicious and doesn't really inflict any meaningful harm, but it still would likely fall afoul of desegregation laws.
|
|
#
?
May 28, 2017 14:21
|
|
|
Ogmius815 posted:Hot take: public accommodations statutes in some states are really broadly worded and ladies night might conflict with them, but holy poo poo who cares chill. let me tell you about ethics in video game journalism
|
|
#
?
May 28, 2017 16:15
|
|
|
Here's your plaintiff. Looking forward to the 5-4 decision.
haveblue fucked around with this message at 18:25 on May 28, 2017 |
|
#
?
May 28, 2017 17:43
|
|
|
haveblue posted:Here's your plaintiff. Looking forward to the 5-4 decision.
|
|
#
?
May 28, 2017 17:46
|
|
|
haveblue posted:Here's your plaintiff. Looking forward to the 5-4 decision. I absolutely 100% guarantee that the supreme court is not going to be issuing a ruling interpreting state statutes on public accomodations.
|
|
#
?
May 28, 2017 20:43
|
|
|
If you don't like anti-discrimination laws preventing people from trying to score obnoxious political points, then perhaps you should try to repeal them.
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2017 02:56
|
|
|
The politics between the government of Texas and the municipality in which its capital is seated are complex and really amusing as long as you don't live there.
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2017 03:41
|
|
|
KernelSlanders posted:The politics between the government of Texas and the municipality in which its capital is seated are complex and really amusing as long as you don't live there. That's par for the course for at least the conservative states (also the nation). A lot of state legislative races in Georgia involve platforms about how much the candidate hates Atlanta, for example.
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2017 03:59
|
|
|
ulmont posted:That's par for the course for at least the conservative states (also the nation). Florida may be the King of this phenomena, except it's not the capital that receives the hate. The yokels who dominate our politics are united in their spite and hate for the southern cities that keep their lights on.
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2017 04:04
|
|
|
I vote against candidates who engage in synecdoche as a matter of principle.
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2017 04:06
|
|
|
Schizotek posted:Florida may be the King of this phenomena, except it's not the capital that receives the hate. The yokels who dominate our politics are united in their spite and hate for the southern cities that keep their lights on. Tallahassee is too boring to hate. For now.
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2017 04:06
|
|
|
GreyjoyBastard posted:Tallahassee is too boring to hate. Tallahassee is clone stamped Valdosta. Boring as fuuuuck and doesn't feel like a capitol at all.
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2017 04:24
|
|
|
Schizotek posted:Florida may be the King of this phenomena, except it's not the capital that receives the hate. The yokels who dominate our politics are united in their spite and hate for the southern cities that keep their lights on. I think this is much more the norm than the focus of the hate being the capital itself. See also: Illinois, New York, California.
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2017 05:12
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/comfortablysmug/status/868871357114851328
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2017 16:57
|
|
|
Shakenbaker posted:Tallahassee is clone stamped Valdosta. Boring as fuuuuck and doesn't feel like a capitol at all. Yeah, it's a medium-ish (200k) college town with a slightly higher proportion of older professionals. I grew up in College Station, Texas which is frankly now a more happening place than Tallahassee.    And growing faster, but Tallahassee is growing.
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2017 17:11
|
|
|
Tallahassee isn't that bad and it's worlds better than loving Valdosta. It's an interesting place because it's really just a tiny rear end rural north florida town like crawfordville, quincy, or monticello, but it happens to be the state capital and have two huge colleges and a junior college. I figure take those away and it's just another 20k person conservative rural town, but with all that added in it's an odd liberal city with a redneck backbone. My favorite part is how my representative in Congress is shared with Jacksonville, Florida but people in the rich part of town shares a rep with PCB. Also gently caress aggy and college station.
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2017 17:56
|
|
|
haveblue posted:Here's your plaintiff. Looking forward to the 5-4 decision. To be fair, if trolling people who ascribe unreasonable importance to a particular brand or media property is no longer legally protected, this forum is going to be even more dead.
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2017 18:05
|
|
|
Dead Reckoning posted:To be fair, if trolling people who ascribe unreasonable importance to a particular brand or media property is no longer legally protected, this forum is going to be even more dead. i dont think "being a dick to women for no reason" is really trolling. it's just being a dick. to women.
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2017 23:42
|
|
|
cis autodrag posted:i dont think "being a dick to women for no reason" is really trolling. it's just being a dick. to women. Dead Reckoning fucked around with this message at 01:23 on May 30, 2017 |
|
#
?
May 30, 2017 01:20
|
|
|
Are you the plaintiff, you sound real mad about Wonder Woman
|
|
#
?
May 30, 2017 01:29
|
|
|
Zack Snyder is directing it? Good god, someone has got to be actively sabotaging the properties at this point.
|
|
#
?
May 30, 2017 01:53
|
|
|
Zack Snyder is not and never was directing Wonder Woman. It's directed by Patty Jenkins, a relatively unknown woman director who's done a bunch of TV stuff and some dramatized biography of a prostitute-turned-serial killer. Snyder produced it but, unfortunately, probably won't be involved with DC movies for a while because his daughter died recently and he's taking a break from his work.
|
|
#
?
May 30, 2017 02:00
|
|
|
VitalSigns posted:Are you the plaintiff, you sound real mad about Wonder Woman Like most goons, I am personally affronted if someone gets excited about a mainstream media property I don't have an interest in. 
|
|
#
?
May 30, 2017 02:03
|
|
|
Dead Reckoning posted:It isn't being a dick to women as a whole, it's being a dick to the subset of people who think Zack Snyder producing a franchise movie about a character that started life as BDSM wank material is An Important Moment For Feminism, as well as a few people who got sucked in by WB's social media campaign to portray their $120 million movie as an underdog that women should buy tickets for to send a message to the patriarchal studio system. And I'm OK with that being legally protected. Is there a well actually emote? I need it
|
|
#
?
May 30, 2017 02:15
|
|
|
cis autodrag posted:Is there a well actually emote? I need it 
|
|
#
?
May 30, 2017 02:19
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 9, 2024 08:40 |
|
|
Tuxedo Catfish posted:Zack Snyder is not and never was directing Wonder Woman. It's directed by Patty Jenkins, a relatively unknown woman director who's done a bunch of TV stuff and some dramatized biography of a prostitute-turned-serial killer. Oh, phew, ok. Sorry, shoulda paid more attention. Though, given DC's producer meddling reputation... edit: he's lead writer.
|
|
#
?
May 30, 2017 02:22
|
|