Woman Rejected From N.Y Eatery For Looking Too Masculine

[Nova]

Me too, FC. I've got to say that I'm really surprised this happened in NYC. It would be ridiculous if it happened anywhere, but I think of New York as being a bit more progressive regarding gender "issues."

I was surprised, too. But, actually, I remember that when I moved there I was shocked to learn that NYC had more conservative conservatives as well as more liberal liberals.

Still, lower Manhattan is rather known for its diversity. That bartender should be forced to watch Rent.

 

[Glow]

My friend is a Lesbian and is very masculine looking and "acting" (wears boxers rather than panties, men's cologne, clothing, wallet in back pocket etc). If she did not have breasts one would not be able to tell that she is a female.

However, she is a female and I have no doubt that if questioned or accused of having mens "parts", she'd simply lift her shirt for them to clear things up. She is a riot!!

Good of her! We live in a time when our social mores are changing. Humor and tolerance will help more than any amount of indignation.

 

[philamena]

To me she looked like a woman with slightly male characteristics. I don't think she and her friends should have been kicked out of the restaurant.

 

[csds703]

I was surprised, too. But, actually, I remember that when I moved there I was shocked to learn that NYC had more conservative conservatives as well as more liberal liberals.

Still, lower Manhattan is rather known for its diversity. That bartender should be forced to watch Rent.

I love that Show. I took my daughter and her friend for her birthday 2 yrs ago.
I am also surprised this happened in NYC. I've seen more offensive looking people in that neighborhood than this woman for sure.

 

[Glow]

To me see looked like a woman with slightly male characteristics. I don't think she and her friends should have been kicked out of the restaurant.

I agree. The bouncer over reacted.

Lots of over reaction going on in this case.

 

[Mimi]

What a horrible assumption to make and more to the point, a horrendous way to deal with it. In this day and age, we all know that people come in all shapes, sizes, forms, images and sexualities...I am appalled at this behaviour...if there was a serious concern, it could have been handled in a much more mature, discreet manner...! WOW!

 

[Glow]

If we agree that Farmer was calm and clear in her responses to this over reactive bouncer, I have only one question

Where is the ACLU?

I would think they would be all over this story. And yet? They as well as all gay rights groups are conspicuously quiet. The only one taking up the banner here is a Trans gender group and yet Farmer says she is not TG?


This has caused me to have other questions...

1) If the problem was a customer complaint of a man in the restroom, what caused the bouncer to demand that Farmer leave not just the restroom, but the restaurant as well, asking her as well as her party to pay their check and leave?

2) Had they ordered and eaten their food and were about to leave or not?

3) Did Farmer and the bouncer exchange words that caused the situation to escalate or was the bouncer just a testosterone laden jerk?

4) Given the fact that Farmer had just marched in a parade, and given the nature of parades (to excite and rally folks) did she contribute to the negativity of this situation in any way?

5) What about the "rights" of a gay woman/man who is a waiter/waitress in this restaurant that might lose their job (or at least tips) if a boycott to "support" Farmer really got off the ground?

6) What about the owner, managers and wait staff in general, do they deserve to have their restaurant suffer economically if the bouncer acted independently?

8) How will suggesting that people just watch "Rent" and calling for a negative economic impact on the restaurant and all its employees help to advance harmony and acceptance of gender differences in the long run?

 

[FlowerChild]

If we agree that Farmer was calm and clear in her responses to this over reactive bouncer, I have only one question

My responses in red...
Where is the ACLU?
I would think they would be all over this story. And yet? They as well as all gay rights groups are conspicuously quiet. The only one taking up the banner here is a Trans gender group and yet Farmer says she is not TG?
The ISSUE is one affecting mostly Transgendered individuals so the Transgendered Defense League is appropriate. Farmer was not being discriminated against because she was GAY, but because her gender and use of the restroom for her gender was questioned because she did not APPEAR to another customer (and the bouncer) to be "female enough" in appearance. She was not just asked to leave the restroom, but to leave the restaurant - and to pay her bill in full whether she was finished eating the food or not. The ACLU isn't needed, the TDL has it covered - it's "their" issue.

This has caused me to have other questions...

1) If the problem was a customer complaint of a man in the restroom, what caused the bouncer to demand that Farmer leave not just the restroom, but the restaurant as well, asking her as well as her party to pay their check and leave?
I am sure both sides reacted badly - but Farmer (the male-appearing lesbian) did nothing to bring on the attack. The woman customer was being an azz, she was told directly by Farmer that she was in the correct restroom and yet she still obviously made an issue out of it with the bouncer. I am thinking that the bouncer was sick and tired of the gay parade crowd and took it out on Farmer. It doesn't matter what Farmer said though, the bouncer is at fault.
"the bouncer told her "he wanted me out of his bathroom and restaurant."

2) Had they ordered and eaten their food and were about to leave or not?
They had gotten their meal and were eating. It really doesn't matter where in the meal this took place, they were not ready to leave.

3) Did Farmer and the bouncer exchange words that caused the situation to escalate or was the bouncer just a testosterone laden jerk?
I am sure they did exchange words, he entered the ladies room, beat on Farmers' stall door and accused her of being a man in the ladies room and then refused to look at her DL to see that she WAS a woman. I would have said a few words - just about any woman would have said a few words. Farmer is an HIV counselor by profession, I am sure she did not go ballistic.

4) Given the fact that Farmer had just marched in a parade, and given the nature of parades (to excite and rally folks) did she contribute to the negativity of this situation in any way?
How is going into the correct restroom negative? I think the only negative behavior in this is the behavior of the woman who questioned Farmer's gender (and didn't believe her) and went to the bouncer and the bouncer himself.Perhaps the more "gay" crowd from the rally affected some people negatively, but that is their problem, not hers.

5) What about the "rights" of a gay woman/man who is a waiter/waitress in this restaurant that might lose their job (or at least tips) if a boycott to "support" Farmer really got off the ground?
She is not asking for a boycott.
"Transgender Legal Defense & Education Fund, demanded that the restaurant compensate Farmer for violating her civil rights and adopt a policy banning discrimination."

6) What about the owner, managers and wait staff in general, do they deserve to have their restaurant suffer economically if the bouncer acted independently?
He said...he wanted her out of his property. He acted as the authority, whether he HAD the mandate of the owner doesn't matter, he obviously acted as the authority. None of the staff questioned him and no manager was present.

8) How will suggesting that people just watch "Rent" and calling for a negative economic impact on the restaurant and all its employees help to advance harmony and acceptance of gender differences in the long run?
It won't, education is the key - education and business policies banning discrimination in any form. The DL should have ended this dispute in a few minutes. Some standard must be agreed upon and a DL is the best one at this time.

The restaurant is a fault - because it allowed the bouncer to be in charge and he acted on behalf of the restaurant. Ignorance is not a defense. He ejected Farmer and her two companions because he didn't like a masculine woman using the ladies restroom. No crime occurred, no "scene" at the restaurant was reported, no customers have come forward to say that Farmer acted in any way inappropriately. The restaurant has the right not to serve anyone, but if it discriminates in that refusal it must be prepared to defend it's actions to the public.

My Opinion

 

[sherri79]

this started off as a simple mistake. some1 saw what they thought was a man in a women's bathroom and complained. the restaurant sent a bouncer to check it out. so far i see no real problem. i have heard of more than 1 woman who was raped in a restroom. if the bar had said it was no big deal and it had been a sicko in there setting up a video camera or peeping over stalls or a rapist they would be at fault because they did not act when told of the problem. at this point for all the bouncer knew it could be a drunk man who went in the wrong room by mistake. at that point i have no problem with what is happening.

now you have a bouncer in the restroom demanding that the "man" leave. once this person said she was female and had ID its a simple thing. even if the customer is offended and acting angry the right thing to do is so easy. the bouncer says "miss i am so very sorry. i had a complaint and had to act on it. we will give you a free round of drinks for your table or would you like a free order of the house special for your party?" if the bouncer was acting in good faith to protect the females in the bar he could have tried to smooth things over with a simple "I'm sorry" i understand the need to keep men away from a area where women tend to lower their pants especially when those women may have been drinking and less able to protect themselves. what i don't understand is "if" this was a simple mistake why on earth you would make her leave??? wouldn't the bouncer have a duty to protect every woman in the bar from being harassed ??? he harassed this woman. this restaurant flew the rainbow flag on gay pride day.... perhaps they should have looked at it as more than a marketing stunt.

 

[FlowerChild]

YES, sherri79!
Why did he (bouncer) refuse to look at Farmer's ID? It seems to be proper for determining the drinking age, why not to determine gender?
Farmer told the woman exiting the restroom "she was in the right place" when the woman confronted her about being in the "wrong" bathroom. She obviously thought a "man" was nefariously but very openly going to use the women's room - although that doesn't make much sense. So she tells the bouncer. The mistakes were
The bouncer accosting Farmer in the stall and not waiting for her to at least exit - she was alone in the bathroom and the bouncer could see that
The bouncer NOT accepting a legal ID as proof Farmer was a woman
The bouncer ejecting Farmer and two friends from the establishment and asking them to PAY 1st

Obviously this "bouncer" lacks even rudimentary hospitality skills and should never have been allowed to do more than confront the person - a manager should have taken over at that point when a mistake was made in gender ID.

Men are not as good as most women at looking for the subtle signs of "gender" - I am sure the bouncer THOUGHT he was "right" but not accepting a legal ID as proof of gender reeks of discrimination and bullying. He was trying to save face by insisting he "knew more" and a "man" was trying to pull one over on him. He refused to accept he was wrong and made a mistake and instead of being embarrassed and making amends, he decided to "bully" his way into being in the "right". THAT's why he kicked them out - he could not accept HE had been so wrong. He decided being "right" was more important than the reputation of the establishment.

And yes, if you are going to fly a rainbow flag then you had better train your staff to handle ALL gay customers, not just the ones who are strictly defined in appearance as to gender. Surely some lesbian women strive to achieve a masculine appearance and the bouncer knew this - I think any NY-er over the age of 20 not only "knows" this, but has SEEN this. I think this went beyond a simple mistaken ID - either due to the ego of the bouncer or because he had an "issue" with people of "fuzzy" gender or gays in general (or both).

My Opinion

 

[Nova]

I agree. The bouncer over reacted.

Lots of over reaction going on in this case.

Indeed, Glow. My reference to Rent was a joke.

As for your concern that employees might also suffer from a boycott, that's too bad. But I'm sure a boycott can be avoided by firing the bouncer responsible and making it clear this was not restaurant policy.

You can't make an omelet without breaking a few eggs.

 

[Glow]

Indeed, Glow. My reference to Rent was a joke.

As for your concern that employees might also suffer from a boycott, that's too bad. But I'm sure a boycott can be avoided by firing the bouncer responsible and making it clear this was not restaurant policy.

You can't make an omelet without breaking a few eggs.

Hi Nova,

I wasn't aware that it was you who mentioned Rent. For some reason I thought it was another poster. Knowing your subtle tongue in cheek style I would like to think that I would have "gotten" that about your post. Serves me right for not reading more carefully.

I agree that the bouncers actions need to be looked at here. Why was he not content to just bang on the door and order her out of the bathroom? Why did it escalate to ordering her out of the entire restaurant? Did she provoke him verbally in any way? Was it ALL the bouncers fault? These are the things we don't know but our not knowing them doesn't render them "non" facts. I was trying to look at it from other angles than the obvious. If the woman was not gay, what would have been an appropriate reason to order her out of the restaurant? Would there be one?

I think that the bouncer over reacted. He should have ascertained that she was a woman and apologized and backed off. If the original complainer wasn't happy with that, he (the bouncer) should have dealt with the complainer and not Farmer, as she would be the "problem" at that point. To say the very least they shouldn't have been forced to pay for a meal they were asked to leave half finished.

As far as the saying about making omelets and breaking eggs, that could apply to Farmer as well. She is moving from what was until recently a subculture into mainstream. There will inevitably be some resistance to that. Its how to handle the mainstreaming that I would like to see a little more tolerance and education. I applaud her representations request that the restaurant adopt and enforce a policy barring discrimination in its restaurants on the basis of gender identity and expression, and sexual orientation. I also applaud their asking Caliente's to train its staff to comply with this policy and all applicable laws protecting the rights of lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender customers in public.

The part that saddens me is the last request: Compensate Farmer for the violation of her civil rights.

I'm sure that this means monetarily and I don't like it because I don't like our sue happy society in general, not because I don't want to see an individual rights protected. But I'm probably in the minority, if not for the litigious viewpoint most people use as a first response these days, then what would all those lawyers do?

 

[Glow]

My responses in red...
The ISSUE is one affecting mostly Transgendered individuals so the Transgendered Defense League is appropriate. Farmer was not being discriminated against because she was GAY, but because her gender and use of the restroom for her gender was questioned because she did not APPEAR to another customer (and the bouncer) to be "female enough" in appearance. She was not just asked to leave the restroom, but to leave the restaurant - and to pay her bill in full whether she was finished eating the food or not. The ACLU isn't needed, the TDL has it covered - it's "their" issue.


I appreciate your taking time to answer the questions in my post. You made a good point about why The TG Defense League would want to take the case. I hadn't thought about some of the reasons you gave.

I am sure both sides reacted badly - but Farmer (the male-appearing lesbian) did nothing to bring on the attack. The woman customer was being an azz, she was told directly by Farmer that she was in the correct restroom and yet she still obviously made an issue out of it with the bouncer. I am thinking that the bouncer was sick and tired of the gay parade crowd and took it out on Farmer. It doesn't matter what Farmer said though, the bouncer is at fault.



Farmer is an HIV counselor by profession, I am sure she did not go ballistic.

I can not be as sure of this as you. Point in case, we have a Psychologist here in my town that was arrested for assault and battery of her neighbor. The dispute was over a trespassing pet. The kicker? The Dr. runs an anger management clinic. I cant discount that Farmer's being a counseler precludes her playing some small role verbally in getting removed from the restaurant. Maybe she did, maybe she didnt. We will probably never know.



6) What about the owner, managers and wait staff in general, do they deserve to have their restaurant suffer economically if the bouncer acted independently?
He said...he wanted her out of his property. He acted as the authority, whether he HAD the mandate of the owner doesn't matter, he obviously acted as the authority. None of the staff questioned him and no manager was present.

How do you know there was no manager present?

education is the key - education and business policies banning discrimination in any form. The DL should have ended this dispute in a few minutes. Some standard must be agreed upon and a DL is the best one at this time.

I agree with you 100% that education is key.

Thanks again Flowerchild for the time you took to frame your answers. I dont think we have ever posted together before. It was nice to do so. :blushing: