It's a Satchel, Like a Purse, But Not
November 28, 2010 1:20 PM Subscribe
YANAL: What is the legality of not allowing a man to carry a bag into a South Dakota movie theater?
I have a bicycle bag that I carry with me at all times that contains generic bicycle supplies should I get a flat or other problem as well as a Clif bar should I become famished away from home.
Clearly I agree with the Boy Scout's, "Be prepared."
I rode my bicycle to the movie theater yesterday to enjoy a film. However, once I purchased my ticket, they demanded that I relinquish my helmet and bag to their storage—for "safety" reasons. They also claimed concern over my smuggling in recording equipment: never mind that my phone has a very nice HD camera.
What are the legal grounds of them confiscating my bag? They allow women in with their purses (I did not know this at the time, but they allowed a female in my group to bring in their purse), and cannot guarantee the safety of the contents of my bag. (There isn't a locker system where I would be the only one with access to the key.)
Overall I was incensed at their sexist behavior and made the regrettable decision of not demanding a refund: that is, not speaking with my wallet.
What legal grounds do they have for the confiscation of my bag if they are not also confiscating women's purses? Isn't this blatant sexism?
I have a bicycle bag that I carry with me at all times that contains generic bicycle supplies should I get a flat or other problem as well as a Clif bar should I become famished away from home.
Clearly I agree with the Boy Scout's, "Be prepared."
I rode my bicycle to the movie theater yesterday to enjoy a film. However, once I purchased my ticket, they demanded that I relinquish my helmet and bag to their storage—for "safety" reasons. They also claimed concern over my smuggling in recording equipment: never mind that my phone has a very nice HD camera.
What are the legal grounds of them confiscating my bag? They allow women in with their purses (I did not know this at the time, but they allowed a female in my group to bring in their purse), and cannot guarantee the safety of the contents of my bag. (There isn't a locker system where I would be the only one with access to the key.)
Overall I was incensed at their sexist behavior and made the regrettable decision of not demanding a refund: that is, not speaking with my wallet.
What legal grounds do they have for the confiscation of my bag if they are not also confiscating women's purses? Isn't this blatant sexism?
Isn't this blatant sexism?
This isn't even close to sexism and nothing to base some kind of court case on.
posted by pintapicasso at 1:37 PM on November 28, 2010 [1 favorite]
This isn't even close to sexism and nothing to base some kind of court case on.
posted by pintapicasso at 1:37 PM on November 28, 2010 [1 favorite]
It doesn't help that your bicycle bag looks like a camera bag, unlike my purse, which looks like a purse.
posted by muddgirl at 1:40 PM on November 28, 2010 [2 favorites]
posted by muddgirl at 1:40 PM on November 28, 2010 [2 favorites]
They are not confiscating your bag. You are voluntarily giving it to them in order to access private property. You do not have to give them your bag and they do not have to let you enter.
Confiscation is something that only police officers and law enforcement can do. This is a private business, on private land, with its own arbitrary regulations. The "on the street" laws do not apply.
posted by meowzilla at 1:42 PM on November 28, 2010
Confiscation is something that only police officers and law enforcement can do. This is a private business, on private land, with its own arbitrary regulations. The "on the street" laws do not apply.
posted by meowzilla at 1:42 PM on November 28, 2010
I don't think confiscate is the word you want. They asked you to check your bag. They don't ask women to check bags of a similar size. Double standard? Yes. Court case? Doubt it.
posted by fixedgear at 1:42 PM on November 28, 2010
posted by fixedgear at 1:42 PM on November 28, 2010
Did you see females with bike bags being allowed to bring them in? Otherwise I don't think you can say this is sexist behavior.
posted by oneirodynia at 1:44 PM on November 28, 2010 [1 favorite]
posted by oneirodynia at 1:44 PM on November 28, 2010 [1 favorite]
Best answer: IANAL, but the presumption is that when you make a contract for services, either party can ask for any terms it wants, and the other party can either accept or refuse those terms. If you believe that the terms they ask for are illegal, you need to cite a specific law that you believe their terms are breaking. So, if you want to see a movie at their theater and their desired terms are that you pay $8.50 and agree not to videotape the movie with your iPhone, you have the right to accept or reject those terms. If, however, they demanded that you give them your firstborn child in exchange for a movie ticket, you could rightly point out that selling other human beings is illegal and refuse to comply with those terms in exchange for the ticket.
So here, if you want to say that they are legally barred from taking your bag, you need to cite a specific portion of the law in your jurisdiction that prevents them from making that demand in exchange for a movie ticket. I am not aware of any jurisdiction in the United States that prohibits business owners from allowing some types of handbags and not others, but if you really want to know, you should look at laws in your jurisdiction to find a legal provision that is specifically on point or that you believe covers your situation. Just saying "sexism is bad" is not a legal argument.
posted by decathecting at 1:46 PM on November 28, 2010
So here, if you want to say that they are legally barred from taking your bag, you need to cite a specific portion of the law in your jurisdiction that prevents them from making that demand in exchange for a movie ticket. I am not aware of any jurisdiction in the United States that prohibits business owners from allowing some types of handbags and not others, but if you really want to know, you should look at laws in your jurisdiction to find a legal provision that is specifically on point or that you believe covers your situation. Just saying "sexism is bad" is not a legal argument.
posted by decathecting at 1:46 PM on November 28, 2010
Confiscation implies that they took it away from you by force. What they did was ask you to surrender articles that may make business difficult for them. Many stores where I live ask you to do likewise, to prevent shoplifting. These stores also let many women, albeit not all, hang onto their purses.
There are feminine-hygiene-related articles (tampons, pads, etc.) women keep in their purses that they may need immediately at any time, which may not be practical to keep on their person. This is not the case with your bicycle bag. If you were carrying something medical-related or life-preserving in there, and told them so, I have a feeling they would have let you keep your bag.
posted by griphus at 1:46 PM on November 28, 2010
There are feminine-hygiene-related articles (tampons, pads, etc.) women keep in their purses that they may need immediately at any time, which may not be practical to keep on their person. This is not the case with your bicycle bag. If you were carrying something medical-related or life-preserving in there, and told them so, I have a feeling they would have let you keep your bag.
posted by griphus at 1:46 PM on November 28, 2010
You're over thinking this in terms of making it a court case. You should contact the manager of the theatre. If you've already dealt with one, escalate the issue up the chain of command. Your complaint is valid and you should certainly air it. Be nice and polite, but firm that this is a issue and that they're losing out on a sale for a silly reason. Do not take it personally, just firmly and continuously press your point. If they continue, ask them what sort of insurance are they willing to put up for guaranteeing that your bag and its contents will remain safe. Make a list of all the items usually in your bag and how much they cost. Again ask them how are they going to ensure that it and the contents inside will not be damaged or stolen. After all, if they want to confiscate it, they're taking responsibility for it, right?
In the future, perhaps offer to open the bag so they can no camera is inside.
posted by nomadicink at 1:52 PM on November 28, 2010 [2 favorites]
In the future, perhaps offer to open the bag so they can no camera is inside.
posted by nomadicink at 1:52 PM on November 28, 2010 [2 favorites]
They have a right to refuse service to anyone for any reason
Eh, not so much. They do have the right to refuse service to anyone, but they don't have the right to do so for absolutely any reason. It would be blatantly illegal for them to refuse admission to blacks or women or Muslims for example.
I feel for you, because I see this kind of crap going on all the time and it really pisses me off too, but it would be a stretch to actually pursue such a claim. They are, in fact, allowing one group of people to bring in bags of a certain volume, while prohibiting another group from doing the same, solely on the basis of sex. Certainly, if a store insisted on storing or searching the bags of black customers while never bothering white customers, that would be discriminatory behavior and we'd all be jumping up and down to criticize them (not that this doesn't happen regularly in some places). But realistically, it would cost a ton of money to sue, your case would probably get dismissed at some point, and even if you won, your damages are fairly minimal, so there's really no chance of actually pursuing this in court. Just another of the small injustices in life to bend over and take.
posted by zachlipton at 1:53 PM on November 28, 2010 [3 favorites]
Eh, not so much. They do have the right to refuse service to anyone, but they don't have the right to do so for absolutely any reason. It would be blatantly illegal for them to refuse admission to blacks or women or Muslims for example.
I feel for you, because I see this kind of crap going on all the time and it really pisses me off too, but it would be a stretch to actually pursue such a claim. They are, in fact, allowing one group of people to bring in bags of a certain volume, while prohibiting another group from doing the same, solely on the basis of sex. Certainly, if a store insisted on storing or searching the bags of black customers while never bothering white customers, that would be discriminatory behavior and we'd all be jumping up and down to criticize them (not that this doesn't happen regularly in some places). But realistically, it would cost a ton of money to sue, your case would probably get dismissed at some point, and even if you won, your damages are fairly minimal, so there's really no chance of actually pursuing this in court. Just another of the small injustices in life to bend over and take.
posted by zachlipton at 1:53 PM on November 28, 2010 [3 favorites]
Seconding muddgirl, the reason you probably got so much trouble from the theater is that your bike bag really does look like a camera bag. I own three bikes and have 5 bikes in my house total, and I've never seen a bike bag like that. I'd think that was a camera bag, too, which is most likely why they didn't let you in. Not just because you had any old bag with you.
posted by two lights above the sea at 1:55 PM on November 28, 2010
posted by two lights above the sea at 1:55 PM on November 28, 2010
Response by poster: You're over thinking this in terms of making it a court case.
I don't want to sue them or make a court case out of this, I'm merely wondering how legal it was for them to demand that I give up my bag. (Which, apparently, is quite legal.)
However, escalating up the chain would be doable.
posted by 47triple2 at 1:55 PM on November 28, 2010
I don't want to sue them or make a court case out of this, I'm merely wondering how legal it was for them to demand that I give up my bag. (Which, apparently, is quite legal.)
However, escalating up the chain would be doable.
posted by 47triple2 at 1:55 PM on November 28, 2010
However, escalating up the chain would be doable.
Feel free to make a blog post about the situation, with their name address and the people you dealt with it and link to in several local newspapers or websites and THEN send an email message to someone up the chain with links to the blog post and other things.
The central question you should be asking is how much work and effort are they willing to put into ensuring that your property, which they are requesting, will remain safe. Whatever they promise, ask for it in writing. If that's an issue, remind them that it cost you money and if they were in your situation wouldn't they want some sort of guarantee that their belongings were safe and insured?
Then ask them if all of this is worth a $10 movie ticket.
posted by nomadicink at 2:01 PM on November 28, 2010
Feel free to make a blog post about the situation, with their name address and the people you dealt with it and link to in several local newspapers or websites and THEN send an email message to someone up the chain with links to the blog post and other things.
The central question you should be asking is how much work and effort are they willing to put into ensuring that your property, which they are requesting, will remain safe. Whatever they promise, ask for it in writing. If that's an issue, remind them that it cost you money and if they were in your situation wouldn't they want some sort of guarantee that their belongings were safe and insured?
Then ask them if all of this is worth a $10 movie ticket.
posted by nomadicink at 2:01 PM on November 28, 2010
I'm a woman (and please don't call me 'a female', though that's a huge derail), and I almost never carry anything others would describe as a "purse". I carry my stuff in a tote bag, messenger bag, or satchel. And, yes, if I'm carrying a big bag which doesn't match the person in charge's idea of a handbag, I am sometimes asked to check it. I have no problem with this.
I agree that it's odd, not to mention annoying. I've noticed that it's more likely to happen at places of business where teenagers hang out, too, which I guess makes the management more uptight and likely to act like hard-asses to everyone, regardless of age. And, yeah, there's often a degree of hypocrisy or inconsistent thought patterns (they're movie theater managers, not attorneys). But there's nothing you can really do about it.
posted by Sara C. at 2:10 PM on November 28, 2010 [1 favorite]
I agree that it's odd, not to mention annoying. I've noticed that it's more likely to happen at places of business where teenagers hang out, too, which I guess makes the management more uptight and likely to act like hard-asses to everyone, regardless of age. And, yeah, there's often a degree of hypocrisy or inconsistent thought patterns (they're movie theater managers, not attorneys). But there's nothing you can really do about it.
posted by Sara C. at 2:10 PM on November 28, 2010 [1 favorite]
South Dakota prohibits sex discrimination in public accommodations. S. Dak. Cod. Laws 20-13-23 ("It shall be an unfair or discriminatory practice for any person engaged in the provision of public accommodations because of race, color, creed, religion, sex, ancestry, disability, or national origin, to fail or refuse to provide to any person access to the use of and benefit from the services and facilities of such public accommodations; or to accord adverse, unlawful, or unequal treatment to any person with respect to the availability of such services and facilities, the price or other consideration therefor, the scope and equality thereof, or the terms and conditions under which the same are made available ...."). *If* men with bags are treated differently from similarly situated women with bags, such different treatment could violate state law.
posted by ClaudiaCenter at 2:10 PM on November 28, 2010
posted by ClaudiaCenter at 2:10 PM on November 28, 2010
A movie theater is a "place of public accomodation", and generally, discrimination based on sex is not permitted.
If your bag, carried by a woman, would have been allowed, then they really don't have a right to deny you the same treatment.
posted by mmf at 2:12 PM on November 28, 2010
If your bag, carried by a woman, would have been allowed, then they really don't have a right to deny you the same treatment.
posted by mmf at 2:12 PM on November 28, 2010
Also, this is along the lines of something that I did when I was about 16 years old.
My friends and I were a punky bunch. We weren't excessively strange looking, just kind of young and weird. I believe I had very, very short platinum blond hair and loved to color my clothing, one of my friends was your classic "raver", and the other was a very beautiful teenageg Punky Brewster. Three of us went into a dollar store after school one day, and the owner/manager took one look at us and said, "Get out! You can't come in here!". So we're like "Whatever, buddy! It's a free country! You can't kick us out!" and the manager says, "Oh yes I can!" and immediately calls the police. The police come and gently remind us that, Yes, the owner can kick us out of the store because it is private property and we have no right to be there. We weren't really causing a problem, and the cop probably took pleasure in informing us of our rights. I was dumb when I was 16!
Moral of the story, you don't have to do anything a store asks you to do*, but you'll most likely have to leave if you don't comply.
*discrimination is normally a huge exception here, but I honestly don't think you were discriminated against. I think your bag really was a red flag for them. It screams camera bag.
posted by two lights above the sea at 2:14 PM on November 28, 2010
My friends and I were a punky bunch. We weren't excessively strange looking, just kind of young and weird. I believe I had very, very short platinum blond hair and loved to color my clothing, one of my friends was your classic "raver", and the other was a very beautiful teenageg Punky Brewster. Three of us went into a dollar store after school one day, and the owner/manager took one look at us and said, "Get out! You can't come in here!". So we're like "Whatever, buddy! It's a free country! You can't kick us out!" and the manager says, "Oh yes I can!" and immediately calls the police. The police come and gently remind us that, Yes, the owner can kick us out of the store because it is private property and we have no right to be there. We weren't really causing a problem, and the cop probably took pleasure in informing us of our rights. I was dumb when I was 16!
Moral of the story, you don't have to do anything a store asks you to do*, but you'll most likely have to leave if you don't comply.
*discrimination is normally a huge exception here, but I honestly don't think you were discriminated against. I think your bag really was a red flag for them. It screams camera bag.
posted by two lights above the sea at 2:14 PM on November 28, 2010
*If* men with bags are treated differently from similarly situated women with bags, such different treatment could violate state law.
You'd probably need to prove that women carrying identical bags were allowed to carry them into the theater. Which would be hard, because I'm sure there are plenty of examples of women who were asked to check non-purse bags.
posted by Sara C. at 2:14 PM on November 28, 2010 [1 favorite]
You'd probably need to prove that women carrying identical bags were allowed to carry them into the theater. Which would be hard, because I'm sure there are plenty of examples of women who were asked to check non-purse bags.
posted by Sara C. at 2:14 PM on November 28, 2010 [1 favorite]
The law you're probably thinking of is the equal protection clause of the 14th Amendment. The US Supreme Court has generally held that citizens ought not to be subject to discrimination on the basis of immutable characteristics such as race or gender. However, discrimination on the basis of gender is generally not examined as closely as potential cases of discrimination on the basis of race or religion. In the case Craig v. Boren (1976) the Supreme Court established a standard of "intermediate scrutiny" under which gender discrimination claims were to be evaluated, such that if distinction was made between genders by a law the distinction would have to be substantially related to the achievement of specific government objectives.
Again, however, in the movie theater situation it's a private contract between private individuals, I'm not sure that the equal protection clause would apply unless it's because it's providing a public conveyance, but a real lawyer would have to tell you that...
posted by Diablevert at 2:14 PM on November 28, 2010
Again, however, in the movie theater situation it's a private contract between private individuals, I'm not sure that the equal protection clause would apply unless it's because it's providing a public conveyance, but a real lawyer would have to tell you that...
posted by Diablevert at 2:14 PM on November 28, 2010
It's a private establishment. They have a right to refuse service to anyone for any reason.
Cool Papa Bell
I've heard this quoted often enough - is this really true though? What if I owned a restaurant or bus service that refused service to persons of a certain color or gender, or made it a lot harder to comply with my rules if you were a certain color of gender?
That being said, it looks like the solution they've chosen is probably the best among all possible choices they could have made. Say for example, if you had things your way, and a movie theatre made it their policy to completely ban bags of all kinds, that would certainly impact women unfairly as the majority of women carry a handbag when going out while most men stuff their mobile / wallet in their pockets, so it could be seen as far more "anti women" than their current policy is "anti men"
The other alternative, for them to allow all bags of any sort into movie theatres is... problematic for their own reasons. Makes it a lot easier to smuggle food and drink into the theatres, which they then don't make money on yet have to spend labour and manpower to clean up: also whatever food you bring could make a much worse mess than popcorn. And of course the security concerns (someone leaving a satchel bomb under a seat in a dark theatre...)
posted by xdvesper at 2:17 PM on November 28, 2010
Cool Papa Bell
I've heard this quoted often enough - is this really true though? What if I owned a restaurant or bus service that refused service to persons of a certain color or gender, or made it a lot harder to comply with my rules if you were a certain color of gender?
That being said, it looks like the solution they've chosen is probably the best among all possible choices they could have made. Say for example, if you had things your way, and a movie theatre made it their policy to completely ban bags of all kinds, that would certainly impact women unfairly as the majority of women carry a handbag when going out while most men stuff their mobile / wallet in their pockets, so it could be seen as far more "anti women" than their current policy is "anti men"
The other alternative, for them to allow all bags of any sort into movie theatres is... problematic for their own reasons. Makes it a lot easier to smuggle food and drink into the theatres, which they then don't make money on yet have to spend labour and manpower to clean up: also whatever food you bring could make a much worse mess than popcorn. And of course the security concerns (someone leaving a satchel bomb under a seat in a dark theatre...)
posted by xdvesper at 2:17 PM on November 28, 2010
Sara C.: You'd probably need to prove that women carrying identical bags were allowed to carry them into the theater. Which would be hard, because I'm sure there are plenty of examples of women who were asked to check non-purse bags
You could test this, though, with a male and female patron carrying identical bags entering the theatre. To make it a less blatant test and prove discrimination based not on the details of the bag but the gender of the patron, I would suggest the same bag but give the female patron a pink version and the male patron a black version.
A messenger bag would work well for this - the pink one worn over the shoulder and the bacl one worn cross-body. I'd be very interested in the results.
posted by DarlingBri at 2:22 PM on November 28, 2010 [3 favorites]
You could test this, though, with a male and female patron carrying identical bags entering the theatre. To make it a less blatant test and prove discrimination based not on the details of the bag but the gender of the patron, I would suggest the same bag but give the female patron a pink version and the male patron a black version.
A messenger bag would work well for this - the pink one worn over the shoulder and the bacl one worn cross-body. I'd be very interested in the results.
posted by DarlingBri at 2:22 PM on November 28, 2010 [3 favorites]
The "safety" reasons may have been legit fire/evacuation safety concerns. In an emergency, a purse can be kicked aside or shoved under a seat. Your helmet and relatively large, structured bag might block or trip people trying to get out. To test your sexism question, bring a more purse-like, small cloth or leather shoulder bag. Or, have a female friend try to bring a small suitcase into the theater.
posted by Meg_Murry at 2:23 PM on November 28, 2010
posted by Meg_Murry at 2:23 PM on November 28, 2010
Again, however, in the movie theater situation it's a private contract between private individuals, I'm not sure that the equal protection clause would apply unless it's because it's providing a public conveyance
Equal Protection isn't particularly relevant here. The 1964 Civil Rights Act bans discrimination in "public accommodations," of which a movie theater certainly qualifies. Most if not all states have similar laws as well, such as the South Dakota statue ClaudiaCenter quoted. Private businesses can refuse to serve you, but they cannot discriminate.
posted by zachlipton at 2:28 PM on November 28, 2010
Equal Protection isn't particularly relevant here. The 1964 Civil Rights Act bans discrimination in "public accommodations," of which a movie theater certainly qualifies. Most if not all states have similar laws as well, such as the South Dakota statue ClaudiaCenter quoted. Private businesses can refuse to serve you, but they cannot discriminate.
posted by zachlipton at 2:28 PM on November 28, 2010
I've heard this quoted often enough - is this really true though? What if I owned a restaurant or bus service that refused service to persons of a certain color or gender, or made it a lot harder to comply with my rules if you were a certain color of gender?
I was speaking in general about refusing service based on customer behavior. My use of the term "any" was overly broad. Title II of the Civil Rights Act indeed makes it illegal for businesses providing public accommodation to refuse service based on race. There are also various court cases regarding "ladies night" promotions that are unsettled, but these are focused on costs and access, not behaviors like carrying a bag.
Moreover, this is a federal law. You'd have to make this case in a federal court, not a local one. That raises the enforcement bar quite a bit.
As an interesting aside, the Civil Rights Act does not prohibit private clubs from discriminating. You could, in theory, have a members-only movie theater, and then you could do whatever you want.
posted by Cool Papa Bell at 2:40 PM on November 28, 2010
I was speaking in general about refusing service based on customer behavior. My use of the term "any" was overly broad. Title II of the Civil Rights Act indeed makes it illegal for businesses providing public accommodation to refuse service based on race. There are also various court cases regarding "ladies night" promotions that are unsettled, but these are focused on costs and access, not behaviors like carrying a bag.
Moreover, this is a federal law. You'd have to make this case in a federal court, not a local one. That raises the enforcement bar quite a bit.
As an interesting aside, the Civil Rights Act does not prohibit private clubs from discriminating. You could, in theory, have a members-only movie theater, and then you could do whatever you want.
posted by Cool Papa Bell at 2:40 PM on November 28, 2010
When I was a motorcyclist I carried my stuff in a messenger bag. I walked into a Wal-Mart once and was told by the greeter that I had to leave my bag with him. When I walked back from doing the shopping, I noticed that he had left the bag lying in the open and was not observing it. So being the jerk I am, I picked my bag up and moved it to where he couldn't see it, then got his attention.
Waste of time, of course. Upsetting someone about their failure to do their job assumes they have any sense of duty about their job.
The reason we have all this legislation that specifically prohibits systematic discrimination based on gender, race, etc. is precisely because otherwise, merchants are generally entitled to refuse service, access etc. based on any rules they may choose to create. The general "protection" to the public is they can vote with their dollars as to whether the rules are reasonable. You'll have a tough time making a case about this without it being more trouble than it's worth, and you'd be better served either finding out from their management if there's a way you can hang on to your bag, or ensure that the bag is indeed being safeguarded when not in your custody.
posted by randomkeystrike at 2:56 PM on November 28, 2010
Waste of time, of course. Upsetting someone about their failure to do their job assumes they have any sense of duty about their job.
The reason we have all this legislation that specifically prohibits systematic discrimination based on gender, race, etc. is precisely because otherwise, merchants are generally entitled to refuse service, access etc. based on any rules they may choose to create. The general "protection" to the public is they can vote with their dollars as to whether the rules are reasonable. You'll have a tough time making a case about this without it being more trouble than it's worth, and you'd be better served either finding out from their management if there's a way you can hang on to your bag, or ensure that the bag is indeed being safeguarded when not in your custody.
posted by randomkeystrike at 2:56 PM on November 28, 2010
Museums do this to people all the time: GINORMOUS purses are allowed in, but backpacks and other more utilitarian bags must be checked (regardless of size). As a woman who often carries a small backpack in lieu of a purse, this irks me to no end - but I think it's the *type of bag* that is being singled out, not the gender of the carrier.
posted by chez shoes at 2:57 PM on November 28, 2010 [5 favorites]
posted by chez shoes at 2:57 PM on November 28, 2010 [5 favorites]
I've heard this quoted often enough - is this really true though? What if I owned a restaurant or bus service that refused service to persons of a certain color or gender, or made it a lot harder to comply with my rules if you were a certain color of gender?
They can refuse service for any reason except legally protected ones. So:
"get out of my store, asshole"
is ok. But:
"get out of my store, you [race|gender|religion] asshole"
is not.
Basically.
posted by gjc at 3:23 PM on November 28, 2010 [1 favorite]
They can refuse service for any reason except legally protected ones. So:
"get out of my store, asshole"
is ok. But:
"get out of my store, you [race|gender|religion] asshole"
is not.
Basically.
posted by gjc at 3:23 PM on November 28, 2010 [1 favorite]
Museums do this to people all the time: GINORMOUS purses are allowed in, but backpacks and other more utilitarian bags must be checked (regardless of size). As a woman who often carries a small backpack in lieu of a purse, this irks me to no end - but I think it's the *type of bag* that is being singled out, not the gender of the carrier.
A lot of times backpacks or bags worn on the back are singled out because you might accidentally turn around and knock something over with the bag, which you are less likely to do with a bag that is under your arm or at your side.
I think the problem here might really just be that your bike bag looks just like a camera bag.
posted by elpea at 4:03 PM on November 28, 2010
A lot of times backpacks or bags worn on the back are singled out because you might accidentally turn around and knock something over with the bag, which you are less likely to do with a bag that is under your arm or at your side.
I think the problem here might really just be that your bike bag looks just like a camera bag.
posted by elpea at 4:03 PM on November 28, 2010
Recently I was asked to check my large tote bag "purse" at an art museum. Like you, I did not like this at all because I had doubts about letting it out of my sight. It was explained that they didn't want me bumping into the art with my big tote bag (....which is stupid, why would I do that)?? I agreed to "check" my bag and later when I returned my bag was in view at the reception and "unmanned". Irksome!
Two weeks later I returned to the same museum with the same bag and this time I was not told that I had to check it! I agree with everyone else...we have no "grounds" for complaining--but it's clear that the enforcement of these rules are based on the whim of the enforcer. You should go back sometime and see if you get in with the case. It would be interesting to point out to the manager if they don't have consistent rules. Only interesting...not satisfying in any other way.
posted by naplesyellow at 5:49 PM on November 28, 2010
Two weeks later I returned to the same museum with the same bag and this time I was not told that I had to check it! I agree with everyone else...we have no "grounds" for complaining--but it's clear that the enforcement of these rules are based on the whim of the enforcer. You should go back sometime and see if you get in with the case. It would be interesting to point out to the manager if they don't have consistent rules. Only interesting...not satisfying in any other way.
posted by naplesyellow at 5:49 PM on November 28, 2010
I agree with everyone else there is no legal issue, but with cycling in general and commuting/utilitarian cycling in particular on the rise in many places, I would encourage you to post your experience on the most trafficked local bike blog. More people might care about this than you think.
posted by werkzeuger at 5:57 PM on November 28, 2010
posted by werkzeuger at 5:57 PM on November 28, 2010
This thread is closed to new comments.
posted by Cool Papa Bell at 1:36 PM on November 28, 2010 [4 favorites]