Thai Constitution

[katoeylover]

a Club is private, i believe, if they charge an admission charge.

[Guest]

(Sid the sexist @ Mar. 20 2007,00:15) Well, good luck with your crusade. I won't be signing the petition.

I think all private businesses should be allowed to say who they allow in to use their property. If a hotel doesn't like ladyboys good luck to them. There are plenty of hotels that do. There are plenty of Jap clubs that don't allow farangs and I wholeheartedly support their right to turn me away. Q Bar aint the only club in town. Take her to one of the multitude of clubs that allow ladyboys.

This is not about human rights. If she was beaten half to death for trying to get in Q Bar you'd have a case. But being turned away is the chance you take when you go out to a new place.

I'd like to see ALL smokers barred from pubs, clubs and restaurants. I'd like to see drunks evicted from bars and beaten to death by police squads. I'd like every person who wants to enter a public area to take a piss test and if they fail it they should have DRUGGIE stamped on their foreheads till they are clean. I'd like Muslims to be forced to renounce violence or face life inside a Thai prison until they do. I'd like to see gun owners all shot through the heart with their own weapons. I'd like to see all flights from Africa stopped right now and no-one should get in or out of that foul continent. I'd like to see ALL law breakers in the UK do a minimum of one year inside and if they haven't got a British passport then they should be expelled along with any friends and family members they have. I'd like to see ALL illegal immigrants repatriated so the UK is safe from these horrible dirty criminal foreigners that the government seems to be sucking off at the moment. I'd like to see the Arab world bombed back to the stoneage and then we can march in and take the oil for free.

If a business wants to hire men only or women only or monkeys only then they should be free to do so. And if cripples are driving cars around town why should they get the best parking spaces? It's madness.

So you are sore because your missus can't spend the night dancing at a trendy night club? Welcome to Thailand.

I wish the rest of the world had the balls to follow in its' path...

Fellow Libertarian?
You can't achieve freedom without having the guts and toughness to handle the outcome when others exercise theirs'. Q bar has every right to discriminate ladyboys, and we have every right to discriminate Q bar. I for one will never visit Q bar now having the knowledge on how they look at me and my partners. I don't need no Q bar to prove my legitimacy.

[Guest]

(Napalm @ Mar. 22 2007,07:37)

(mardhi @ Mar. 20 2007,04:13) There is no 'right' to be admitted to private property anywhere - even in politically correct places such as London or LA. I would not worry about this Ziggy and just go to somewhere where your Baht and custom is welcomed.

Cheers
Mardhi

Well its a bit more complicated than that, a club is not private unless its membership is private and therefore only accesable by card carrying members???

I hate this notion of club or restaurant or whatever is not private. When I had my restaurant in NYC, the stupid socialistic government said it's not private, so all the bums can come in to use the restroom and so on. Fuck that. If you are not the one paying rent, you don't have ownership. Disagree with this? You can vote your country/city/state to the former soviet union again if you want.

[Guest]

Whoever think the Q bar owners should be obligated to let everybody in should publish their address here so me and my drunken friends can visit them at 2AM to exercise my human rights.
OK, sick joke, but you see my point? peace.

[Mai-Kee]

I have no clue what you're talking about, or the Q-bar policies changed totally within the last 18 months. I've been to Q-bar uncounted times with lb's, or went home, or to the Penthouse st round the corner, with lb's I met there. Last time I've been in there was with Areeya in July 05. Drinking with the staff on the first floor, etc. Absolutely, no problem whatsoever. Always a great time, fabulous music, great quality of drinks, etc. Same goes for the Bed - although the quality of the drinks at Q-bar is by far the best in BKK!
Maybe if you take some raunchy streethooker from Sukh. they might get angry, but that goes for the raunchy gg's as well. Seriously, I never ever had a problem and I consider myself as a regular there when I'm in LOS.


MK

[rxpharm]

It seems the discussions may be missing the point here. It is not just a matter of a "private" business not allowing certain clients admission.

There is a big difference between dress codes, or behavior of clients and the intrinsic nature of the client. For example, I don't think many of you would disagree it would be wrong to ban all women or blacks or etc. from entering a club. In fact many of the exclusive clubs in North America and UK have been sued successfully and now have to open admission to anyone - suitably attired and behaving according to the standards outlined.

The case that Ziggy refers to happened last year, when he and May attempted to enter QBar. May was not dressed as a sleazy "hooker", but as a fashionable young woman.

So there you have it - is it right to ban someone who is polite, well behaved, dressed properly just because of their intrinsic nature, be they lb, black, female, Jewish, etc?

I would say no, and I think most reasonable people would agree.

[katoeylover]

But this isnt London or New York, and I still believe, whether right or wrong, in a right to admission. And yes, there are still a number of male only and female only clubs in London.

[Guest]

Finally, rx got it.

Everybody is using ridiculous analogies here. Of course if you use ridiculous analogies you can reach any conclusion you want.

This post is not about flights from Africa, smoking, excessively drunken behavior, or fat women with flip flops.

Let me give you a precise example. I went to QBar with 3 LBs. We had just come from a fashion shoot. They were wearing extremely high class gowns and were exceptionally made up. I was wearing a suit jacket (a rare event). We looked like high rollers. We arrived with my car and driver. We hadn't had one drink. It was very, very early, maybe 9pm. We were rejected at the entrance, and told straight out, it was because of the gender of my companions.

I have also had the same rejection once before with May where we went as a couple, once again, well made up, not drunk, not wearing flip-flops, not acting insane, etc.

I too agree to the basic right of some establishments to reject people who don't meet the reasonable norms of that establishment (dress code, drunkenness), or because they are looking to let in a certain type of clientelle like in New York. That was not this case.

So how can anyone think that that is ok?

If it were a rejection due to religion, race, or color you would it is not ok, nor would anyone else. We only think it is ok because we sub-consciously do not equate a LB's gender on the same level with those other identifications, i.e., you are saying it is ok BECAUSE ESTABLISHMENTS CAN GET AWAY WITH IT. That is the most insulting kind of discrimination; you do it because you can.

So, it is quite frightening to me actually, that many of you who posted do not equate gender on an equal footing with religion, race, and color. This is the one thing most of us want in society, and most of you are fighting against it!

As for public or private establishments, how long do you think a restaurant or bar in the US would survive before getting sue'd if it rejected all black and muslim people? In this context of basic human rights, the legal status of being private for a restaurant or bar is not relevant. For a home, yes, perhaps, but these are public places, anyone can go in. It advertises, it is open to the public. You are mixing a legal description with a practical fact.

So, if you want to exaggerate about flip flopped fat women in SupperClub, or any other exaggeration, go ahead, but it has no relationship, in my opinion, to the issue of protection of gender as a basic human right in this context.

[Guest]

One more point...

The main reason most of you are saying it is ok, is because it is not you.

I would not like to be a LB partner of yours if that is your mentality.

[Guest]

I agree with ziggy here. You may say these are private business and therefore have to right to refuse entry to whom they like but I disagree.

This is a basic human rights issue albeit one that may not have the impact of having the right to medical treatment, education etc.

This is the same sort of discrimination that most of us on this forum abhor because we see these girls as mostly beautiful, talented people and not as many other parts of society who simply discriminate based on their perceived gender.

My personal opinion is we should never discriminate based on gender, race, religion. All other things being equal they should be treated equally.

[mardhi]

Sounds to me that the 3 LB's were your pawns in your attack on Q-Bar given that you already knew the policy of the bar, yet decided to allow them to be humiliated and lose face, knowing with a probably high level of certainty that they would not be admitted. Maybe some of us, would not even take that risk of humiliating them and would have gone to a LB friendly venue instead.

Maybe next time suggest Spasso or 87 at the Conrad where you would have been welcomed as a valued customer. I really dont see why you you spend so much energy attacking a place which lets face is just ok and when there are so many other options available.

I am not specifically defending Q Bar - personally I think their policy sucks but I am not going to get worked up over it and lose sleep about the policies they have introduced.

Cheers
Mardhi

[ShockToe]

It's a minor point but the 1997 Consitutution was abrogated on 19 Sep. 2006. The coup leaders have promised a new one sometime this year.

For now there is an interim Constitution.

Martial Law is still in effect in 35 of 76 provinces (Muslim south, north and northeast areas) so I wouldn't expect much traction on human right's issues.

[katoeylover]

Good Point Mardhi,

Why would you go back with 3 ladyboys, knowing they would get humiliated by being refused entry. Especially as there are many better clubs that would love your patronage?

Strange.

[Guest]

I went once with May to QBar about a year ago, got rejected.

I thought the policy might have changed, or that was an off night or month due to some incident, so tried again. It was also a place they wanted to see.

I don't intentionally humiliate LBs, as you 2 guys of all people, know very well. Why would you post crap like that?

Also, you are totally missing the point. It has nothing to do with QBar. It is the principle of gender discrimination generally, including in places I never go. And as most LBs know, it is increasing, particularly in Pattaya.

[katoeylover]

A quick phone call would have answered the question, if it was still bar policy, with out the need to visit.

No, i dont think it was a deliberate act, of course not, but i personally would never ever go back to a place where i had been turned away from before.