FabSwingers.com > Forums > Swinging Club Discussion > single males and the cost of getting into a club.
single males and the cost of getting into a club.
Jump to: Newest in thread
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
 ) would not think this is a problem, but others may be put off by large amounts of single men, and would stop going. Then you have a club full of single men.
There is a possibility of 'packs' of men attending the club and becoming a nuisance. I've not personally experienced the 'train of guys' that can sometimes follow a single woman or couple, but have no doubt it happens.
Having said the above, I am not a club owner. Just an experienced goer, and that's just my opinion up there. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
 | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I can imagine that the electricity bill alone for a club with a full wet area like yours at Partners would make the average household bill look like buying a battery for a torch! "lol an understatement Bumpkin. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I can imagine that the electricity bill alone for a club with a full wet area like yours at Partners would make the average household bill look like buying a battery for a torch! "Our electric bill alone is £550 per month!!!!  | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I can imagine that the electricity bill alone for a club with a full wet area like yours at Partners would make the average household bill look like buying a battery for a torch!
Our electric bill alone is £550 per month!!!! "Ahh but your club is lush and toasty warm | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"As a club owner said above its a business and it needs to make money, if not it closes. Much like the demographics on this site (and every other swinging site) there are far more men than couples, and even less single ladies. The majority of these people want to meet ladies, either as couples or single, that's just the way it is. Lots of men in a club would put many couples/ladies off. Therefore you would have a club full of men, then of course the men would stop going as there were no ladies. Business then closes. The simplest way to stop this happening is to charge more for men relative to women. " I think your reply here reflects your username perfectly | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"As a club owner said above its a business and it needs to make money, if not it closes. Much like the demographics on this site (and every other swinging site) there are far more men than couples, and even less single ladies. The majority of these people want to meet ladies, either as couples or single, that's just the way it is. Lots of men in a club would put many couples/ladies off. Therefore you would have a club full of men, then of course the men would stop going as there were no ladies. Business then closes. The simplest way to stop this happening is to charge more for men relative to women. " TBH these are the same sort of flimsy excuses that businesses used for years to not pay women equal pay, or not pay a minimum wage ie the only way I can run my business is to discriminate against someone. In this day and age if you can't run a business without discriminating then you shouldn't be in business. Most Women don't expect to get a free ride in an other area of life. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"As a club owner said above its a business and it needs to make money, if not it closes. Much like the demographics on this site (and every other swinging site) there are far more men than couples, and even less single ladies. The majority of these people want to meet ladies, either as couples or single, that's just the way it is. Lots of men in a club would put many couples/ladies off. Therefore you would have a club full of men, then of course the men would stop going as there were no ladies. Business then closes. The simplest way to stop this happening is to charge more for men relative to women. TBH these are the same sort of flimsy excuses that businesses used for years to not pay women equal pay, or not pay a minimum wage ie the only way I can run my business is to discriminate against someone. In this day and age if you can't run a business without discriminating then you shouldn't be in business. Most Women don't expect to get a free ride in an other area of life." So what is the solution? Close all clubs that charge more for single men?! If you read above the 'flimsy excuse' explains what would happen if positive discrimination was not applied. A club full of single men; no couples, no females this would last about a week or until the men realised they were not going to get their dicks wet. But hey! Treat everybody equal. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
 | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"There are a few possible problems when it comes to reducing male member costs: The lower the price for men, the more men there will be there. Now some people (like me ) would not think this is a problem, but others may be put off by large amounts of single men, and would stop going. Then you have a club full of single men.
There is a possibility of 'packs' of men attending the club and becoming a nuisance. I've not personally experienced the 'train of guys' that can sometimes follow a single woman or couple, but have no doubt it happens.
Having said the above, I am not a club owner. Just an experienced goer, and that's just my opinion up there."The argument of reducing costs for single men meaning more single men in club is a myth and easily manageable if clubs are run right. All clubs can restrict the amounts coming in say on first in door get in till level is reached. Same as say if a normal club on a weekend is full until folk leave no one else is allowed in. Same applies re couples and single women. Fact is for all those who moan about single men in clubs all owners realise single men and current prices are what keep them in business as in effect we are subsidising single women who get in free. If single men were stopped then clubs would have to raise costs for couples and single ladies to cover everything. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" The argument of reducing costs for single men meaning more single men in club is a myth and easily manageable if clubs are run right. All clubs can restrict the amounts coming in say on first in door get in till level is reached. Same as say if a normal club on a weekend is full until folk leave no one else is allowed in. Same applies re couples and single women. Fact is for all those who moan about single men in clubs all owners realise single men and current prices are what keep them in business as in effect we are subsidising single women who get in free. If single men were stopped then clubs would have to raise costs for couples and single ladies to cover everything." see... i am going to look at this differently.... the cost of a club actually isn't stopping people from going..... its stopping people from going as much as they like!!!! if they want to go to a club... do what adults have to do in the rest of life if they want something.... budget!!! if i know i am going for a weekend away... i have to budget for that... if i know i am going for a weekend night in a city centre and want to have a good time.... i have to budget for that... if i wanted to buy some new nice clothes and shoes for example.... i have to budget for that heck... if i wanted to go on holiday somewhere really exotic.... i have to budget for that so if you want to go to a club... guess what... budget for it!!!! | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"There are a few possible problems when it comes to reducing male member costs: The lower the price for men, the more men there will be there. Now some people (like me ) would not think this is a problem, but others may be put off by large amounts of single men, and would stop going. Then you have a club full of single men.
There is a possibility of 'packs' of men attending the club and becoming a nuisance. I've not personally experienced the 'train of guys' that can sometimes follow a single woman or couple, but have no doubt it happens.
Having said the above, I am not a club owner. Just an experienced goer, and that's just my opinion up there.
The argument of reducing costs for single men meaning more single men in club is a myth and easily manageable if clubs are run right.
"Not true - every free club night we've been to (where everyone gets in for free) has seen a higher number of male attendees. And most men who post on threads like these state they'd visit clubs more often if entry fees were less. " All clubs can restrict the amounts coming in say on first in door get in till level is reached. Same as say if a normal club on a weekend is full until folk leave no one else is allowed in. Same applies re couples and single women. " How many men would be happy travelling to a club assuming they'd get in only to be told at the door "sorry you've missed the boat"? Would they honestly hang around on the street for hours waiting for someone to leave? I doubt it - and why should they? " Fact is for all those who moan about single men in clubs all owners realise single men and current prices are what keep them in business as in effect we are subsidising single women who get in free. " No. What keeps clubs in business is regular visitors, membership fees (which are usually tiny in comparison to gym memberships, Sky subscriptions etc) and profits from bars, whether licensed or selling soft drinks at 100% mark up. " If single men were stopped then clubs would have to raise costs for couples and single ladies to cover everything." Debatable. There are clubs where it's always been couples/single fems only - they survive. Others use limits on single males. They survive. I'm personally against quotas or limits. Letting in a fixed number doesn't guarantee in any way that those guys will be of interest to the couples and women present and limits the options for those groups - and offers little in the way of advantage for the men let in. As Fabio says - budget. As a couple we have to do just that. We travel a hell of a distance to our regular haunt and would love to go more often. But we can't. The cost is one reason. A | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
 | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"There are a few possible problems when it comes to reducing male member costs: The lower the price for men, the more men there will be there. Now some people (like me ) would not think this is a problem, but others may be put off by large amounts of single men, and would stop going. Then you have a club full of single men.
There is a possibility of 'packs' of men attending the club and becoming a nuisance. I've not personally experienced the 'train of guys' that can sometimes follow a single woman or couple, but have no doubt it happens.
Having said the above, I am not a club owner. Just an experienced goer, and that's just my opinion up there.
The argument of reducing costs for single men meaning more single men in club is a myth and easily manageable if clubs are run right.
Not true - every free club night we've been to (where everyone gets in for free) has seen a higher number of male attendees. And most men who post on threads like these state they'd visit clubs more often if entry fees were less.
All clubs can restrict the amounts coming in say on first in door get in till level is reached. Same as say if a normal club on a weekend is full until folk leave no one else is allowed in. Same applies re couples and single women.
How many men would be happy travelling to a club assuming they'd get in only to be told at the door "sorry you've missed the boat"? Would they honestly hang around on the street for hours waiting for someone to leave? I doubt it - and why should they?
Fact is for all those who moan about single men in clubs all owners realise single men and current prices are what keep them in business as in effect we are subsidising single women who get in free.
No. What keeps clubs in business is regular visitors, membership fees (which are usually tiny in comparison to gym memberships, Sky subscriptions etc) and profits from bars, whether licensed or selling soft drinks at 100% mark up.
If single men were stopped then clubs would have to raise costs for couples and single ladies to cover everything.
Debatable. There are clubs where it's always been couples/single fems only - they survive. Others use limits on single males. They survive.
I'm personally against quotas or limits. Letting in a fixed number doesn't guarantee in any way that those guys will be of interest to the couples and women present and limits the options for those groups - and offers little in the way of advantage for the men let in.
As Fabio says - budget. As a couple we have to do just that. We travel a hell of a distance to our regular haunt and would love to go more often. But we can't. The cost is one reason.
A"Agree totally. 200 mile round trip to our favourite club so the event is normally a weekender for us and involves a hotel stay. I can just imagine rocking up and being told sorry, we are full after all that planning. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I pay £100 a month for my virgin subscription so I don't think club memberships are that expensive. If you work out club memberships to a monthly cost, I think you will find it's not much. However everyone has their own opinions "see i was paying nearly that for my sky.... but then i went to see what i was actually watching and using... and i brought that down to somewhere closer to 65 pounds a month.... that money i have saved means i have money to be doing other things,.... and so on, and so on..... | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I pay £100 a month for my virgin subscription so I don't think club memberships are that expensive. If you work out club memberships to a monthly cost, I think you will find it's not much. However everyone has their own opinions "That isn't really the point, it is the fact single men as group are paying more than couples or fems. Your Virgin cost the same whatever your gender. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I pay £100 a month for my virgin subscription so I don't think club memberships are that expensive. If you work out club memberships to a monthly cost, I think you will find it's not much. However everyone has their own opinions
That isn't really the point, it is the fact single men as group are paying more than couples or fems. Your Virgin cost the same whatever your gender."no they arent, men pay the actual price to get in, women and couples pay a discounted amount, its not about men paying more. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" no they arent, men pay the actual price to get in, women and couples pay a discounted amount, its not about men paying more." No offence, but that's a ridiculous thing to say. If one group pays less, the other group pays more, there's no way around that. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" no they arent, men pay the actual price to get in, women and couples pay a discounted amount, its not about men paying more. No offence, but that's a ridiculous thing to say. If one group pays less, the other group pays more, there's no way around that." actually no it isnt... it can be legally argued successfully that less people would be inclined to go if the prices charged were the same.... would you be tempted to go to a club if there were less of the type of people you were interested in going.... less couples and single fems that go... less men that go....less people go in general... clubs close... | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" no they arent, men pay the actual price to get in, women and couples pay a discounted amount, its not about men paying more. No offence, but that's a ridiculous thing to say. If one group pays less, the other group pays more, there's no way around that." It's not so ridiculous IMO. Clubs have to work harder or offer incentives to women and to a lesser degree, couples, for them to attend. Guys will attend no matter what. Single women in London clubs are rare as rocking horse shit. So club owners must wonder how to attract more of the people they need in their club..... How would you encourage single women, if not with free or reduced entry? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" It's not so ridiculous IMO. Clubs have to work harder or offer incentives to women and to a lesser degree, couples, for them to attend. Guys will attend no matter what. Single women in London clubs are rare as rocking horse shit. So club owners must wonder how to attract more of the people they need in their club..... How would you encourage single women, if not with free or reduced entry?" I didn't question the business reasons for the difference in pricing. I said that I think it's ridiculous to claim that men are paying the 'actual' price - men pay more so that women and couples can pay less, and the club makes enough money to keep going. The 'actual' price per person is less than what men pay and more than what women and couples pay. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" It's not so ridiculous IMO. Clubs have to work harder or offer incentives to women and to a lesser degree, couples, for them to attend. Guys will attend no matter what. Single women in London clubs are rare as rocking horse shit. So club owners must wonder how to attract more of the people they need in their club..... How would you encourage single women, if not with free or reduced entry? I didn't question the business reasons for the difference in pricing. I said that I think it's ridiculous to claim that men are paying the 'actual' price - men pay more so that women and couples can pay less, and the club makes enough money to keep going. The 'actual' price per person is less than what men pay and more than what women and couples pay. " It's however you want to look at it. I've always seen my £10 or free entry as a female discount to make it more appealing for me. I also attend Torture Garden where everyone pays the same (usually £25-£38) but at that club no incentives for any particular group are required. It's always full and gender balanced. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"As a club owner it is not very often that I respond to forum posts as I find the same subjects are gone over again and again. On this occasion I would like to respond from a business point of view. A few years ago, especially before the smoking ban in clubs came into effect there were probably around 4 or 5 clubs in the north west, slowly this has increased and now there are a lot more. There has also been a massive increase in the amount of swinging websites that are now on-line and coupled with the far greater technology that is now available to the users of these sites people are finding it far easier to communicate and meet up without having to visit a club. With this in mind and getting back to your concerns regarding the costs of visiting a club a club owners priorities are 1) To attract as many customers to the club as possible. 2) To provide as good as possible facilities for it's customers. and very importantly 3)To make a profit, we are of course a business and if we don't make a profit then we are unable to operate as a business and we wouldn't be open for too long. As a club with a considerable high volume of traffic we have to also cover costs for maintainance, improvements and other expensive running costs, all in all I am sure you will agree in today's climate opening and running a swingers club would probably be more foolhardy than a good business venture. Now having said all this and taking into consideration your concerns regarding fee's for single guys I am very pleased to tell you that we have reduced our annual membership this year from £60 for 12 months to £40 for 12 months. We offer you one of the best equipped clubs in the UK with a spa/wet area that is second to none, we have one of the biggest and best equipped dungeons of any club and that is overlooked by a glass floor. We have themed rooms that include a maze area, an orgy room, glory hole facilities, numerous private rooms and two superbly fitted out bar/lounge areas. We have full facilities including DJ equipment and laser lighting for any themed nights or events we have at the club. And all this in a relaxed, friendly and very importantly, a very safe environment. I would like to see you here at partners in the very near future where hopefully we can show you that you really are getting good value for the money you are spending to join and enter our club." And a very good job of running the club to clive and the best wet area of all clubs | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Apologies as I can't remember who asked this. My nearest local vanilla club charges a fiver to get in on certain nights and a tenner at most. That's for everyone. It costs 30 quid for a single male in some swinger clubs. Explain the difference please. And getting your dick wet as someone eloquently put it is neither guaranteed nor an excuse to charge more for entry." If you reduce the price for men, more turn up and therefore there is more competition. The ratio of single women/couples to men decreases. Secondly, fewer single women/couples could turn up because of the high number of single guys. Let's not beat about the bush here. People go to Swingers Clubs for sex and from a single guys point of view what you really want (I presume) is less competition and therefore more chance of you meeting someone you actually like as opposed grabbing what might be available. Moral of the story... Be careful what you wish for and if you are really bright - start campaigning for higher prices for single men! | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I really love the assumption that all single men at a club are there to fuck anyone who'll have them." I certainly wouldn't assume that all are there to do that but 15 years of experience tells me that many, if not most, are. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I really love the assumption that all single men at a club are there to fuck anyone who'll have them. I certainly wouldn't assume that all are there to do that but 15 years of experience tells me that many, if not most, are." In my experience, it's guilty until proven innocent. And it's made as hard as possible to prove your innocence - which makes the higher prices just that little bit more annoying. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"As I've said twice already, I'm not questioning the discount. I'm just saying let's call it what it is - a subsidy, paid for by the single men who attend. " it isnt a subsidy, it is what it is, a discount, the cost of entry is lets say £30, thats what a single man pays because that gender is well represented, couples and single women are offered discounts as a way of tempting more in because those are under represented, nothing ridiculous about it at all, and I dont think its that hard to understand. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"In my experience, it's guilty until proven innocent. And it's made as hard as possible to prove your innocence - which makes the higher prices just that little bit more annoying. " Where is the guilt in wanting sex with anyone at a club? What is there to be innocent about? We can probably number the guys that have knocked us back on the fingers of 2 hands and we certainly aren't god's gift - it's rare. We are happy with that situation and don't consider them guilty of not having standards as you seem to be suggesting. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Its not a discount as such its a price structure to encourage the correct mix of people, I know there are arguments to do it other ways but that's the way most clubs choose to do it. Your argument the single men subsidise couples and single women is not true in all clubs, I believe va only allow up to 10 single guys on a Friday night depending on how many couples are in and no single guys on a Saturday so they are only a small fraction of the clubs income " VA also have a much more even pricing structure - on a Friday night, a single male would pay £5 more than a couple and about three times what a single woman would pay, whereas at AbFabs on the same night I'd pay twice as much as a couple and six times as much as a single woman. From what I've heard of VA's facilities, I suspect AbFabs operating costs are significantly higher (heating that pool can't be cheap), which is why I think that AbFabs in particular uses single men to subsidise the rest, given that prices for couples and single women are about the same at both clubs. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"What a lot of these messages are forgetting that entry price or membership fee is only one figure. Clubs also sell drinks, snacks. Would single guys in a club buy as many drinks as a couple in a club?" Would a single woman? If you're using the purchase of other consumables as a justification for differences in pricing, single women should pay the same as single men, with couples discounted compared to both. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I really love the assumption that all single men at a club are there to fuck anyone who'll have them. I certainly wouldn't assume that all are there to do that but 15 years of experience tells me that many, if not most, are. In my experience, it's guilty until proven innocent. And it's made as hard as possible to prove your innocence - which makes the higher prices just that little bit more annoying. " If I were a good looking, fit and horny single guy, I would go to the Club that charged most for single men. I can't believe that you can't see the logic in that. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
Football clubs offer discounts as do many other businesses in trying to attract certain customers. But as stated earlier it appears that clubs are using high prices to limit the number of single men, easier than having more turn up and then having to turn them away because you already a set number inside.
Still nothing to stop single guys arranging to meet ladies in a normal pub then going on to the swingers club after as a couple. Or go a night allowing single guys, meet a lady there and arrange another meet as a couple the following night or week. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" If I were a good looking, fit and horny single guy, I would go to the Club that charged most for single men. I can't believe that you can't see the logic in that." I see the logic, I just reject it. You and I clearly want different things from a club experience. I'm not looking to definitely get laid, I want to go somewhere pleasant and meet people. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" If I were a good looking, fit and horny single guy, I would go to the Club that charged most for single men. I can't believe that you can't see the logic in that. I see the logic, I just reject it. You and I clearly want different things from a club experience. I'm not looking to definitely get laid, I want to go somewhere pleasant and meet people. " Try a pub, particularly if sex is not on your agenda. You will meet people in a nice pub for sure. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" Try a pub, particularly if sex is not on your agenda. You will meet people in a nice pub for sure." Ah, so I'm only allowed to go to clubs on terms acceptable to you. I do apologise. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
 | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"We can all have our own opinion on this but if men got in free and women had to pay 30 quid there would be a riot. It's sexist pricing end of story. I get the arguments about keeping it mixed to a fair level. It is what it is. When i go to a club i will budget accordingly and hopefully have a good time. If i don't i won't go back simples." no there wouldnt be a riot, there would simply be a huge down turn in women attending turning it into a cockfest, which is why many people say if you dont like it dont go simple as that, it isnt sexist at all, an oap or a child pays half fare of a standard adult on a bus is there an outcry for ageism, no and there never has been, likewise entry to a football ground, oaps and kids pay less than me, disabled get in free, no complaints from anyone and rightly so, many competitions we enter for various things womens and under 18s entry is often half or less of that of the normal entry, and again no sexist complaints or ageist, its simply as explained above, a discount from the actual entry to entice under represented genders. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"We can all have our own opinion on this but if men got in free and women had to pay 30 quid there would be a riot. It's sexist pricing end of story. I get the arguments about keeping it mixed to a fair level. It is what it is. When i go to a club i will budget accordingly and hopefully have a good time. If i don't i won't go back simples. no there wouldnt be a riot, there would simply be a huge down turn in women attending turning it into a cockfest, which is why many people say if you dont like it dont go simple as that, it isnt sexist at all, an oap or a child pays half fare of a standard adult on a bus is there an outcry for ageism, no and there never has been, likewise entry to a football ground, oaps and kids pay less than me, disabled get in free, no complaints from anyone and rightly so, many competitions we enter for various things womens and under 18s entry is often half or less of that of the normal entry, and again no sexist complaints or ageist, its simply as explained above, a discount from the actual entry to entice under represented genders." I think you're kidding yourself. If you're charging a different price based on the sex of the person then you are discriminating on the grounds of sex. If you're discriminating on the grounds of sex them you are being sexist. You can't change the meaning of the English language. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"We can all have our own opinion on this but if men got in free and women had to pay 30 quid there would be a riot. It's sexist pricing end of story. I get the arguments about keeping it mixed to a fair level. It is what it is. When i go to a club i will budget accordingly and hopefully have a good time. If i don't i won't go back simples. no there wouldnt be a riot, there would simply be a huge down turn in women attending turning it into a cockfest, which is why many people say if you dont like it dont go simple as that, it isnt sexist at all, an oap or a child pays half fare of a standard adult on a bus is there an outcry for ageism, no and there never has been, likewise entry to a football ground, oaps and kids pay less than me, disabled get in free, no complaints from anyone and rightly so, many competitions we enter for various things womens and under 18s entry is often half or less of that of the normal entry, and again no sexist complaints or ageist, its simply as explained above, a discount from the actual entry to entice under represented genders. I think you're kidding yourself. If you're charging a different price based on the sex of the person then you are discriminating on the grounds of sex. If you're discriminating on the grounds of sex them you are being sexist. You can't change the meaning of the English language." I am not changing the meaning of the english language, if what clubs were doing was sexist or discrimination or breaking any laws in any way do you think it would of been happening for this long, its my job to understand law in this country very well, I can assure you I am not kidding myself, it is simple discount, Example (again), The entry to get in is £30, there is more than enough single men so they dont need to discount those, therefore single men pay the full entry, however couples and women are under represented, the club want to attract more of these, so they discount the full price for couples, and discount it further for women, its not charging men more, they are simply paying the full price, the others are getting a discount. have I explained that clear enough, tell you what why dont you go to court and claim it to be sexist pricing, ill wait outside for you, and you can tell me what the court said, and how much damage the court costs did to your pocket. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"There have already been 2 very lengthy debates on this subject on the Fab forums http://www.fabswingers.com/forum/clubs/360158 http://www.fabswingers.com/forum/clubs/360865 Not sure many people will have more to add as in was debated to death! lol"  omg it was debated to death with a huge response via my Vivente profile post and also a post branching off from it. I think if the OP searched topics he would receive the answers he's looking for | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"We can all have our own opinion on this but if men got in free and women had to pay 30 quid there would be a riot. It's sexist pricing end of story. I get the arguments about keeping it mixed to a fair level. It is what it is. When i go to a club i will budget accordingly and hopefully have a good time. If i don't i won't go back simples. no there wouldnt be a riot, there would simply be a huge down turn in women attending turning it into a cockfest, which is why many people say if you dont like it dont go simple as that, it isnt sexist at all, an oap or a child pays half fare of a standard adult on a bus is there an outcry for ageism, no and there never has been, likewise entry to a football ground, oaps and kids pay less than me, disabled get in free, no complaints from anyone and rightly so, many competitions we enter for various things womens and under 18s entry is often half or less of that of the normal entry, and again no sexist complaints or ageist, its simply as explained above, a discount from the actual entry to entice under represented genders. I think you're kidding yourself. If you're charging a different price based on the sex of the person then you are discriminating on the grounds of sex. If you're discriminating on the grounds of sex them you are being sexist. You can't change the meaning of the English language. I am not changing the meaning of the english language, if what clubs were doing was sexist or discrimination or breaking any laws in any way do you think it would of been happening for this long, its my job to understand law in this country very well, I can assure you I am not kidding myself, it is simple discount, Example (again), The entry to get in is £30, there is more than enough single men so they dont need to discount those, therefore single men pay the full entry, however couples and women are under represented, the club want to attract more of these, so they discount the full price for couples, and discount it further for women, its not charging men more, they are simply paying the full price, the others are getting a discount. have I explained that clear enough, tell you what why dont you go to court and claim it to be sexist pricing, ill wait outside for you, and you can tell me what the court said, and how much damage the court costs did to your pocket." I'm not saying what they are doing is illegal but I am saying it is sexist and by definition discriminatory by what those words mean in the English language as in. Sexist - relating to, involving, or fostering sexism, or attitudes and behaviour toward someone based on the person's gender. Discrimination based on gender Sexism - discrimination based on a person's sex or gender Discrimination - the prejudicial or lack of preferential treatment of different categories of people, especially on the grounds of race, age, or sex. So please tell me, no matter what the business case or how legal it may be, how charging different prices for different sexes is not discrimination on the grounds of sex and as such is a sexist act and so is sexism as defined in simple English | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"We can all have our own opinion on this but if men got in free and women had to pay 30 quid there would be a riot. It's sexist pricing end of story. I get the arguments about keeping it mixed to a fair level. It is what it is. When i go to a club i will budget accordingly and hopefully have a good time. If i don't i won't go back simples. no there wouldnt be a riot, there would simply be a huge down turn in women attending turning it into a cockfest, which is why many people say if you dont like it dont go simple as that, it isnt sexist at all, an oap or a child pays half fare of a standard adult on a bus is there an outcry for ageism, no and there never has been, likewise entry to a football ground, oaps and kids pay less than me, disabled get in free, no complaints from anyone and rightly so, many competitions we enter for various things womens and under 18s entry is often half or less of that of the normal entry, and again no sexist complaints or ageist, its simply as explained above, a discount from the actual entry to entice under represented genders. I think you're kidding yourself. If you're charging a different price based on the sex of the person then you are discriminating on the grounds of sex. If you're discriminating on the grounds of sex them you are being sexist. You can't change the meaning of the English language. I am not changing the meaning of the english language, if what clubs were doing was sexist or discrimination or breaking any laws in any way do you think it would of been happening for this long, its my job to understand law in this country very well, I can assure you I am not kidding myself, it is simple discount, Example (again), The entry to get in is £30, there is more than enough single men so they dont need to discount those, therefore single men pay the full entry, however couples and women are under represented, the club want to attract more of these, so they discount the full price for couples, and discount it further for women, its not charging men more, they are simply paying the full price, the others are getting a discount. have I explained that clear enough, tell you what why dont you go to court and claim it to be sexist pricing, ill wait outside for you, and you can tell me what the court said, and how much damage the court costs did to your pocket. I'm not saying what they are doing is illegal but I am saying it is sexist and by definition discriminatory by what those words mean in the English language as in. Sexist - relating to, involving, or fostering sexism, or attitudes and behaviour toward someone based on the person's gender. Discrimination based on gender Sexism - discrimination based on a person's sex or gender Discrimination - the prejudicial or lack of preferential treatment of different categories of people, especially on the grounds of race, age, or sex. So please tell me, no matter what the business case or how legal it may be, how charging different prices for different sexes is not discrimination on the grounds of sex and as such is a sexist act and so is sexism as defined in simple English" I have already explained it to you, it comes under the word discount, they are not discriminating, they are asking an entry price and then discounting it to under represented people, I cant put it any simpler, if it was discriminatory or sexist in any way, that would deem it breaking a law so it wouldnt be able to do it, yet clubs have had there entrys like this for years, I can 100% gurantee you that no court in this country would rule this pricing either discriminatory or sexist, quite simply because by language or law it isnt either of them, dont believe me, well like I said its my career, and ill wait outside any court you like while you make a fool out of yourself. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"We can all have our own opinion on this but if men got in free and women had to pay 30 quid there would be a riot. It's sexist pricing end of story. I get the arguments about keeping it mixed to a fair level. It is what it is. When i go to a club i will budget accordingly and hopefully have a good time. If i don't i won't go back simples. no there wouldnt be a riot, there would simply be a huge down turn in women attending turning it into a cockfest, which is why many people say if you dont like it dont go simple as that, it isnt sexist at all, an oap or a child pays half fare of a standard adult on a bus is there an outcry for ageism, no and there never has been, likewise entry to a football ground, oaps and kids pay less than me, disabled get in free, no complaints from anyone and rightly so, many competitions we enter for various things womens and under 18s entry is often half or less of that of the normal entry, and again no sexist complaints or ageist, its simply as explained above, a discount from the actual entry to entice under represented genders. I think you're kidding yourself. If you're charging a different price based on the sex of the person then you are discriminating on the grounds of sex. If you're discriminating on the grounds of sex them you are being sexist. You can't change the meaning of the English language. I am not changing the meaning of the english language, if what clubs were doing was sexist or discrimination or breaking any laws in any way do you think it would of been happening for this long, its my job to understand law in this country very well, I can assure you I am not kidding myself, it is simple discount, Example (again), The entry to get in is £30, there is more than enough single men so they dont need to discount those, therefore single men pay the full entry, however couples and women are under represented, the club want to attract more of these, so they discount the full price for couples, and discount it further for women, its not charging men more, they are simply paying the full price, the others are getting a discount. have I explained that clear enough, tell you what why dont you go to court and claim it to be sexist pricing, ill wait outside for you, and you can tell me what the court said, and how much damage the court costs did to your pocket. I'm not saying what they are doing is illegal but I am saying it is sexist and by definition discriminatory by what those words mean in the English language as in. Sexist - relating to, involving, or fostering sexism, or attitudes and behaviour toward someone based on the person's gender. Discrimination based on gender Sexism - discrimination based on a person's sex or gender Discrimination - the prejudicial or lack of preferential treatment of different categories of people, especially on the grounds of race, age, or sex. So please tell me, no matter what the business case or how legal it may be, how charging different prices for different sexes is not discrimination on the grounds of sex and as such is a sexist act and so is sexism as defined in simple English" If you are so confident that it is discrimination take a club to court. If not just avoid clubs and leave those that get it to have fun. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"There have already been 2 very lengthy debates on this subject on the Fab forums http://www.fabswingers.com/forum/clubs/360158 http://www.fabswingers.com/forum/clubs/360865 Not sure many people will have more to add as in was debated to death! lol" Apparently they do.   | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Without getting into the whole 'prices for single men' debate which has been done to death our biggest bugbear is membership fees. It's fine paying membership at a club you are going to visit regularly but it can make a one off visit very costly. Some sort of reciprocal deal between clubs would surely be of benefit to everyone." | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I recently went to a social at Amour in Manchester. It went well and was a good laugh. The speeddating event proving to be a great icebreaker to start conversations that might not otherwise happen. Certainly helped as far encouraging the social side of things. The one thing that I decided as I left was that I want to visit more clubs, to meet more people and make new friends within the community. The only problem with this is the cost of it. For couples or single women, the entry/membership costs aren't that bad. For single guys, it can be extortionate! It could be classed as very sexist, however I also know it's a culture and won't change. What I would like to see though, is an improvement in things. Maybe an option of reduced membership costs in some way? To allow those of us that want to a chance to explore the many different venues without being punished for being male. I'm interested to hear different opinions and maybe ideas that the club owners reading this can listen to? " There's a club in Blackpool that charges everyone the same price. If they can do it.......... | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"As a club owner said above its a business and it needs to make money, if not it closes. Much like the demographics on this site (and every other swinging site) there are far more men than couples, and even less single ladies. The majority of these people want to meet ladies, either as couples or single, that's just the way it is. Lots of men in a club would put many couples/ladies off. Therefore you would have a club full of men, then of course the men would stop going as there were no ladies. Business then closes. The simplest way to stop this happening is to charge more for men relative to women. TBH these are the same sort of flimsy excuses that businesses used for years to not pay women equal pay, or not pay a minimum wage ie the only way I can run my business is to discriminate against someone. In this day and age if you can't run a business without discriminating then you shouldn't be in business. Most Women don't expect to get a free ride in an other area of life." . I assume that you would prefer a club packed full of single men then . | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"A supermarket has a product its not selling, it then puts a discount or a special offer on it in order to make it more enticing, a pub has certain nights its not so busy, it then puts discounts or special offers on to entice people in, whats so hard to get about it, if you dont like it dont go." An excellent analogy . A simple point which is an excellent answer to the question raised . On a simplistic basis , supply and demand . | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"A supermarket has a product its not selling, it then puts a discount or a special offer on it in order to make it more enticing, a pub has certain nights its not so busy, it then puts discounts or special offers on to entice people in, whats so hard to get about it, if you dont like it dont go. An excellent analogy . A simple point which is an excellent answer to the question raised . On a simplistic basis , supply and demand ." thanks, it just seems like no matter how simply you try to put it, how much you explain it, certain people have there mind stuck on one thing and one thing only, and they simply refuse to understand. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"We can all have our own opinion on this but if men got in free and women had to pay 30 quid there would be a riot. It's sexist pricing end of story. I get the arguments about keeping it mixed to a fair level. It is what it is. When i go to a club i will budget accordingly and hopefully have a good time. If i don't i won't go back simples. no there wouldnt be a riot, there would simply be a huge down turn in women attending turning it into a cockfest, which is why many people say if you dont like it dont go simple as that, it isnt sexist at all, an oap or a child pays half fare of a standard adult on a bus is there an outcry for ageism, no and there never has been, likewise entry to a football ground, oaps and kids pay less than me, disabled get in free, no complaints from anyone and rightly so, many competitions we enter for various things womens and under 18s entry is often half or less of that of the normal entry, and again no sexist complaints or ageist, its simply as explained above, a discount from the actual entry to entice under represented genders. I think you're kidding yourself. If you're charging a different price based on the sex of the person then you are discriminating on the grounds of sex. If you're discriminating on the grounds of sex them you are being sexist. You can't change the meaning of the English language. I am not changing the meaning of the english language, if what clubs were doing was sexist or discrimination or breaking any laws in any way do you think it would of been happening for this long, its my job to understand law in this country very well, I can assure you I am not kidding myself, it is simple discount, Example (again), The entry to get in is £30, there is more than enough single men so they dont need to discount those, therefore single men pay the full entry, however couples and women are under represented, the club want to attract more of these, so they discount the full price for couples, and discount it further for women, its not charging men more, they are simply paying the full price, the others are getting a discount. have I explained that clear enough, tell you what why dont you go to court and claim it to be sexist pricing, ill wait outside for you, and you can tell me what the court said, and how much damage the court costs did to your pocket. I'm not saying what they are doing is illegal but I am saying it is sexist and by definition discriminatory by what those words mean in the English language as in. Sexist - relating to, involving, or fostering sexism, or attitudes and behaviour toward someone based on the person's gender. Discrimination based on gender Sexism - discrimination based on a person's sex or gender Discrimination - the prejudicial or lack of preferential treatment of different categories of people, especially on the grounds of race, age, or sex. So please tell me, no matter what the business case or how legal it may be, how charging different prices for different sexes is not discrimination on the grounds of sex and as such is a sexist act and so is sexism as defined in simple English I have already explained it to you, it comes under the word discount, they are not discriminating, they are asking an entry price and then discounting it to under represented people, I cant put it any simpler, if it was discriminatory or sexist in any way, that would deem it breaking a law so it wouldnt be able to do it, yet clubs have had there entrys like this for years, I can 100% gurantee you that no court in this country would rule this pricing either discriminatory or sexist, quite simply because by language or law it isnt either of them, dont believe me, well like I said its my career, and ill wait outside any court you like while you make a fool out of yourself." Either you're deliberately using misdirection to try and confuse the issue or you're confusing what words actually mean with what may or may not be legal. Not all forms of discrimination are illegal but that does not mean that it is not discrimination. So I ask you again, how is offering different prices, whether you call it a discount or not, based on the sex of the person not discriminating on grounds of sex. Your argument on the legality of it is irrelevant to the question and I'm pretty sure that any reasonable and intelligent person, as you claim to be, knows the difference between what words mean and what is legal or illegal. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Before threatening legal action, you need to know the Equality act 2010 inside and out. I will direct you to the bit that discusses positive discrimination at PRIVATE MEMBERS CLUBS. There is a bit in it which goes something like this : "There are some people with protected characteristics who are disadvantaged or under-represented, or have particular needs linked to their characteristics. Positive action provisions in the Act enable private clubs and other associations to take proportionate steps to encourage membership among under-represented groups, or to help people overcome their disadvantages, or to meet their needs" . The steps that can be taken, include offerings discounts and concessions to these identified groups of people. To meet the criteria for the above, the Private Members club needs to advertise its pricing clearly on their website or other media for potential members to peruse prior to taking a membership. So the potential member has a choice of whether to take a membership or not and make an informed decision. The club should also be in a position to justify the pricing structure if questioned by a potential member so that they understand why they may be asked to pay more money than other members. Men and hugely over represented on the swinging scene and women are not. The above clause allows a private members club to have a different pricing structure. Throw legal stuff around all you like, but clubs can actually charge what they like if they are a PRIVATE MEMBERS club. I need to stress this as some clubs do not take membership details off people and are therefore NOT a private members club. For the record, Townhouse do not charge membership fees for anyone. We have events where guys get charged the same as everyone else and events where guys are charged more. Our pricing structure reflects the demand of each individual event. All VERY legal " Firstly, having been to the Townhouse, I found it both an enjoyable and pleasant experience and have no complaints about either the club or your prices. Thanks for the clarification. I was wondering when someone would actually point that out. My argument here is not that what clubs are doing is illegal and I understand the supply and demand business model argument put forward by some and can see how it seems to make sense. My argument is that having differential prices based exclusively on the sex of the person is discrimination on the grounds of sex and, as such is sexist, whether it is legally allowed or not. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"We can all have our own opinion on this but if men got in free and women had to pay 30 quid there would be a riot. It's sexist pricing end of story. I get the arguments about keeping it mixed to a fair level. It is what it is. When i go to a club i will budget accordingly and hopefully have a good time. If i don't i won't go back simples. no there wouldnt be a riot, there would simply be a huge down turn in women attending turning it into a cockfest, which is why many people say if you dont like it dont go simple as that, it isnt sexist at all, an oap or a child pays half fare of a standard adult on a bus is there an outcry for ageism, no and there never has been, likewise entry to a football ground, oaps and kids pay less than me, disabled get in free, no complaints from anyone and rightly so, many competitions we enter for various things womens and under 18s entry is often half or less of that of the normal entry, and again no sexist complaints or ageist, its simply as explained above, a discount from the actual entry to entice under represented genders. I think you're kidding yourself. If you're charging a different price based on the sex of the person then you are discriminating on the grounds of sex. If you're discriminating on the grounds of sex them you are being sexist. You can't change the meaning of the English language. I am not changing the meaning of the english language, if what clubs were doing was sexist or discrimination or breaking any laws in any way do you think it would of been happening for this long, its my job to understand law in this country very well, I can assure you I am not kidding myself, it is simple discount, Example (again), The entry to get in is £30, there is more than enough single men so they dont need to discount those, therefore single men pay the full entry, however couples and women are under represented, the club want to attract more of these, so they discount the full price for couples, and discount it further for women, its not charging men more, they are simply paying the full price, the others are getting a discount. have I explained that clear enough, tell you what why dont you go to court and claim it to be sexist pricing, ill wait outside for you, and you can tell me what the court said, and how much damage the court costs did to your pocket. I'm not saying what they are doing is illegal but I am saying it is sexist and by definition discriminatory by what those words mean in the English language as in. Sexist - relating to, involving, or fostering sexism, or attitudes and behaviour toward someone based on the person's gender. Discrimination based on gender Sexism - discrimination based on a person's sex or gender Discrimination - the prejudicial or lack of preferential treatment of different categories of people, especially on the grounds of race, age, or sex. So please tell me, no matter what the business case or how legal it may be, how charging different prices for different sexes is not discrimination on the grounds of sex and as such is a sexist act and so is sexism as defined in simple English I have already explained it to you, it comes under the word discount, they are not discriminating, they are asking an entry price and then discounting it to under represented people, I cant put it any simpler, if it was discriminatory or sexist in any way, that would deem it breaking a law so it wouldnt be able to do it, yet clubs have had there entrys like this for years, I can 100% gurantee you that no court in this country would rule this pricing either discriminatory or sexist, quite simply because by language or law it isnt either of them, dont believe me, well like I said its my career, and ill wait outside any court you like while you make a fool out of yourself. Either you're deliberately using misdirection to try and confuse the issue or you're confusing what words actually mean with what may or may not be legal. Not all forms of discrimination are illegal but that does not mean that it is not discrimination. So I ask you again, how is offering different prices, whether you call it a discount or not, based on the sex of the person not discriminating on grounds of sex. Your argument on the legality of it is irrelevant to the question and I'm pretty sure that any reasonable and intelligent person, as you claim to be, knows the difference between what words mean and what is legal or illegal." ok for a start try reading that post below yours, it explains alot, and ill try to put it even simpler for you, they arent offering different prices based on gender, they arent saying we will just charge this amount because your a man or this amount because your a woman, thats the way you are looking at it, what they are doing is advertising that on that night the entry for everyone is for eg £30, but because women and couples are under represented we will put a discount on it, in order to try and attract more of those to attend, however because there are more than enough men we have no need to discount, sexism does not come into it, like ive said 3 times now, pick a court take it there, maybe you will get it when someone you can see is official explains it to you. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Before threatening legal action, you need to know the Equality act 2010 inside and out. I will direct you to the bit that discusses positive discrimination at PRIVATE MEMBERS CLUBS. There is a bit in it which goes something like this : "There are some people with protected characteristics who are disadvantaged or under-represented, or have particular needs linked to their characteristics. Positive action provisions in the Act enable private clubs and other associations to take proportionate steps to encourage membership among under-represented groups, or to help people overcome their disadvantages, or to meet their needs" . The steps that can be taken, include offerings discounts and concessions to these identified groups of people. To meet the criteria for the above, the Private Members club needs to advertise its pricing clearly on their website or other media for potential members to peruse prior to taking a membership. So the potential member has a choice of whether to take a membership or not and make an informed decision. The club should also be in a position to justify the pricing structure if questioned by a potential member so that they understand why they may be asked to pay more money than other members. Men and hugely over represented on the swinging scene and women are not. The above clause allows a private members club to have a different pricing structure. Throw legal stuff around all you like, but clubs can actually charge what they like if they are a PRIVATE MEMBERS club. I need to stress this as some clubs do not take membership details off people and are therefore NOT a private members club. For the record, Townhouse do not charge membership fees for anyone. We have events where guys get charged the same as everyone else and events where guys are charged more. Our pricing structure reflects the demand of each individual event. All VERY legal Firstly, having been to the Townhouse, I found it both an enjoyable and pleasant experience and have no complaints about either the club or your prices. Thanks for the clarification. I was wondering when someone would actually point that out. My argument here is not that what clubs are doing is illegal and I understand the supply and demand business model argument put forward by some and can see how it seems to make sense. My argument is that having differential prices based exclusively on the sex of the person is discrimination on the grounds of sex and, as such is sexist, whether it is legally allowed or not." if it was/is sexist it would fall foul of the law and wouldnt be allowed to happen, let alone be allowed to go on for as long as it has. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"We can all have our own opinion on this but if men got in free and women had to pay 30 quid there would be a riot. It's sexist pricing end of story. I get the arguments about keeping it mixed to a fair level. It is what it is. When i go to a club i will budget accordingly and hopefully have a good time. If i don't i won't go back simples. no there wouldnt be a riot, there would simply be a huge down turn in women attending turning it into a cockfest, which is why many people say if you dont like it dont go simple as that, it isnt sexist at all, an oap or a child pays half fare of a standard adult on a bus is there an outcry for ageism, no and there never has been, likewise entry to a football ground, oaps and kids pay less than me, disabled get in free, no complaints from anyone and rightly so, many competitions we enter for various things womens and under 18s entry is often half or less of that of the normal entry, and again no sexist complaints or ageist, its simply as explained above, a discount from the actual entry to entice under represented genders. I think you're kidding yourself. If you're charging a different price based on the sex of the person then you are discriminating on the grounds of sex. If you're discriminating on the grounds of sex them you are being sexist. You can't change the meaning of the English language. I am not changing the meaning of the english language, if what clubs were doing was sexist or discrimination or breaking any laws in any way do you think it would of been happening for this long, its my job to understand law in this country very well, I can assure you I am not kidding myself, it is simple discount, Example (again), The entry to get in is £30, there is more than enough single men so they dont need to discount those, therefore single men pay the full entry, however couples and women are under represented, the club want to attract more of these, so they discount the full price for couples, and discount it further for women, its not charging men more, they are simply paying the full price, the others are getting a discount. have I explained that clear enough, tell you what why dont you go to court and claim it to be sexist pricing, ill wait outside for you, and you can tell me what the court said, and how much damage the court costs did to your pocket. I'm not saying what they are doing is illegal but I am saying it is sexist and by definition discriminatory by what those words mean in the English language as in. Sexist - relating to, involving, or fostering sexism, or attitudes and behaviour toward someone based on the person's gender. Discrimination based on gender Sexism - discrimination based on a person's sex or gender Discrimination - the prejudicial or lack of preferential treatment of different categories of people, especially on the grounds of race, age, or sex. So please tell me, no matter what the business case or how legal it may be, how charging different prices for different sexes is not discrimination on the grounds of sex and as such is a sexist act and so is sexism as defined in simple English I have already explained it to you, it comes under the word discount, they are not discriminating, they are asking an entry price and then discounting it to under represented people, I cant put it any simpler, if it was discriminatory or sexist in any way, that would deem it breaking a law so it wouldnt be able to do it, yet clubs have had there entrys like this for years, I can 100% gurantee you that no court in this country would rule this pricing either discriminatory or sexist, quite simply because by language or law it isnt either of them, dont believe me, well like I said its my career, and ill wait outside any court you like while you make a fool out of yourself. Either you're deliberately using misdirection to try and confuse the issue or you're confusing what words actually mean with what may or may not be legal. Not all forms of discrimination are illegal but that does not mean that it is not discrimination. So I ask you again, how is offering different prices, whether you call it a discount or not, based on the sex of the person not discriminating on grounds of sex. Your argument on the legality of it is irrelevant to the question and I'm pretty sure that any reasonable and intelligent person, as you claim to be, knows the difference between what words mean and what is legal or illegal. ok for a start try reading that post below yours, it explains alot, and ill try to put it even simpler for you, they arent offering different prices based on gender, they arent saying we will just charge this amount because your a man or this amount because your a woman, thats the way you are looking at it, what they are doing is advertising that on that night the entry for everyone is for eg £30, but because women and couples are under represented we will put a discount on it, in order to try and attract more of those to attend, however because there are more than enough men we have no need to discount, sexism does not come into it, like ive said 3 times now, pick a court take it there, maybe you will get it when someone you can see is official explains it to you." And, like I've said at least three times or more, the legality of it is totally irrelevant to the question which, yet again you try to answer by misdirection. Words mean what they mean not what you want them to mean. If I offer a service at a different rate to people based on their sex then I am discriminating on the grounds of sex. It's not a complex legal argument it's simple English which, no matter how much you try to misdirect with arguments of legality, I don't think people would have too much of a problem understanding. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Before threatening legal action, you need to know the Equality act 2010 inside and out. I will direct you to the bit that discusses positive discrimination at PRIVATE MEMBERS CLUBS. There is a bit in it which goes something like this : "There are some people with protected characteristics who are disadvantaged or under-represented, or have particular needs linked to their characteristics. Positive action provisions in the Act enable private clubs and other associations to take proportionate steps to encourage membership among under-represented groups, or to help people overcome their disadvantages, or to meet their needs" . The steps that can be taken, include offerings discounts and concessions to these identified groups of people. To meet the criteria for the above, the Private Members club needs to advertise its pricing clearly on their website or other media for potential members to peruse prior to taking a membership. So the potential member has a choice of whether to take a membership or not and make an informed decision. The club should also be in a position to justify the pricing structure if questioned by a potential member so that they understand why they may be asked to pay more money than other members. Men and hugely over represented on the swinging scene and women are not. The above clause allows a private members club to have a different pricing structure. Throw legal stuff around all you like, but clubs can actually charge what they like if they are a PRIVATE MEMBERS club. I need to stress this as some clubs do not take membership details off people and are therefore NOT a private members club. For the record, Townhouse do not charge membership fees for anyone. We have events where guys get charged the same as everyone else and events where guys are charged more. Our pricing structure reflects the demand of each individual event. All VERY legal Firstly, having been to the Townhouse, I found it both an enjoyable and pleasant experience and have no complaints about either the club or your prices. Thanks for the clarification. I was wondering when someone would actually point that out. My argument here is not that what clubs are doing is illegal and I understand the supply and demand business model argument put forward by some and can see how it seems to make sense. My argument is that having differential prices based exclusively on the sex of the person is discrimination on the grounds of sex and, as such is sexist, whether it is legally allowed or not." Sexism goes on every day and all around us and most of the time, men come out of it positively. I don't see many discussions on here arguing about the proven fact that women still get paid less than men, that women are second rate citizens in many cultures which are prevalent in the UK, that women are bought and sold in this country. Yes the argument here is guys paying more in swinging clubs...not quite the same impact as the above issues but obviously still a gripe as this is about the 4th thread on this very subject in the last month. You can call is sexism, I call it business. I do not want a club filled with guys. You know I love you all as we treat our guys with respect, but as a business, I would be shut down within the month. To avoid this happening, I take advantage of the clause in the Equality Law and use it to keep a ratio of members which sustains a play space that suits our club. This model does not work at every club and you will find that clubs across the country do things differently. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Before threatening legal action, you need to know the Equality act 2010 inside and out. I will direct you to the bit that discusses positive discrimination at PRIVATE MEMBERS CLUBS. There is a bit in it which goes something like this : "There are some people with protected characteristics who are disadvantaged or under-represented, or have particular needs linked to their characteristics. Positive action provisions in the Act enable private clubs and other associations to take proportionate steps to encourage membership among under-represented groups, or to help people overcome their disadvantages, or to meet their needs" . The steps that can be taken, include offerings discounts and concessions to these identified groups of people. To meet the criteria for the above, the Private Members club needs to advertise its pricing clearly on their website or other media for potential members to peruse prior to taking a membership. So the potential member has a choice of whether to take a membership or not and make an informed decision. The club should also be in a position to justify the pricing structure if questioned by a potential member so that they understand why they may be asked to pay more money than other members. Men and hugely over represented on the swinging scene and women are not. The above clause allows a private members club to have a different pricing structure. Throw legal stuff around all you like, but clubs can actually charge what they like if they are a PRIVATE MEMBERS club. I need to stress this as some clubs do not take membership details off people and are therefore NOT a private members club. For the record, Townhouse do not charge membership fees for anyone. We have events where guys get charged the same as everyone else and events where guys are charged more. Our pricing structure reflects the demand of each individual event. All VERY legal Firstly, having been to the Townhouse, I found it both an enjoyable and pleasant experience and have no complaints about either the club or your prices. Thanks for the clarification. I was wondering when someone would actually point that out. My argument here is not that what clubs are doing is illegal and I understand the supply and demand business model argument put forward by some and can see how it seems to make sense. My argument is that having differential prices based exclusively on the sex of the person is discrimination on the grounds of sex and, as such is sexist, whether it is legally allowed or not. if it was/is sexist it would fall foul of the law and wouldnt be allowed to happen, let alone be allowed to go on for as long as it has." Actually that's not correct. Just because the law allows this particular type of discrimination in these particular circumstances does not mean it's not discrimination or that it's not sexist or sexism. What non of you who claim it's not discrimination and sexist have done is say how it's not sexist or discrimination based on the English language definition of those words. All you seem to be saying is that, because it's not illegal it's OK. I'm not arguing about whether it's legally or OK even, I'm arguing that by any reasonable definition of the meaning of the worlds sexist, sexism and discrimination it is all three. What I'm asking those that claim it is not any of those things to do is, using the simple English definitions of those words, explain to me and anyone else how it is not all three. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"We can all have our own opinion on this but if men got in free and women had to pay 30 quid there would be a riot. It's sexist pricing end of story. I get the arguments about keeping it mixed to a fair level. It is what it is. When i go to a club i will budget accordingly and hopefully have a good time. If i don't i won't go back simples. no there wouldnt be a riot, there would simply be a huge down turn in women attending turning it into a cockfest, which is why many people say if you dont like it dont go simple as that, it isnt sexist at all, an oap or a child pays half fare of a standard adult on a bus is there an outcry for ageism, no and there never has been, likewise entry to a football ground, oaps and kids pay less than me, disabled get in free, no complaints from anyone and rightly so, many competitions we enter for various things womens and under 18s entry is often half or less of that of the normal entry, and again no sexist complaints or ageist, its simply as explained above, a discount from the actual entry to entice under represented genders. I think you're kidding yourself. If you're charging a different price based on the sex of the person then you are discriminating on the grounds of sex. If you're discriminating on the grounds of sex them you are being sexist. You can't change the meaning of the English language. I am not changing the meaning of the english language, if what clubs were doing was sexist or discrimination or breaking any laws in any way do you think it would of been happening for this long, its my job to understand law in this country very well, I can assure you I am not kidding myself, it is simple discount, Example (again), The entry to get in is £30, there is more than enough single men so they dont need to discount those, therefore single men pay the full entry, however couples and women are under represented, the club want to attract more of these, so they discount the full price for couples, and discount it further for women, its not charging men more, they are simply paying the full price, the others are getting a discount. have I explained that clear enough, tell you what why dont you go to court and claim it to be sexist pricing, ill wait outside for you, and you can tell me what the court said, and how much damage the court costs did to your pocket. I'm not saying what they are doing is illegal but I am saying it is sexist and by definition discriminatory by what those words mean in the English language as in. Sexist - relating to, involving, or fostering sexism, or attitudes and behaviour toward someone based on the person's gender. Discrimination based on gender Sexism - discrimination based on a person's sex or gender Discrimination - the prejudicial or lack of preferential treatment of different categories of people, especially on the grounds of race, age, or sex. So please tell me, no matter what the business case or how legal it may be, how charging different prices for different sexes is not discrimination on the grounds of sex and as such is a sexist act and so is sexism as defined in simple English I have already explained it to you, it comes under the word discount, they are not discriminating, they are asking an entry price and then discounting it to under represented people, I cant put it any simpler, if it was discriminatory or sexist in any way, that would deem it breaking a law so it wouldnt be able to do it, yet clubs have had there entrys like this for years, I can 100% gurantee you that no court in this country would rule this pricing either discriminatory or sexist, quite simply because by language or law it isnt either of them, dont believe me, well like I said its my career, and ill wait outside any court you like while you make a fool out of yourself. Either you're deliberately using misdirection to try and confuse the issue or you're confusing what words actually mean with what may or may not be legal. Not all forms of discrimination are illegal but that does not mean that it is not discrimination. So I ask you again, how is offering different prices, whether you call it a discount or not, based on the sex of the person not discriminating on grounds of sex. Your argument on the legality of it is irrelevant to the question and I'm pretty sure that any reasonable and intelligent person, as you claim to be, knows the difference between what words mean and what is legal or illegal. ok for a start try reading that post below yours, it explains alot, and ill try to put it even simpler for you, they arent offering different prices based on gender, they arent saying we will just charge this amount because your a man or this amount because your a woman, thats the way you are looking at it, what they are doing is advertising that on that night the entry for everyone is for eg £30, but because women and couples are under represented we will put a discount on it, in order to try and attract more of those to attend, however because there are more than enough men we have no need to discount, sexism does not come into it, like ive said 3 times now, pick a court take it there, maybe you will get it when someone you can see is official explains it to you. And, like I've said at least three times or more, the legality of it is totally irrelevant to the question which, yet again you try to answer by misdirection. Words mean what they mean not what you want them to mean. If I offer a service at a different rate to people based on their sex then I am discriminating on the grounds of sex. It's not a complex legal argument it's simple English which, no matter how much you try to misdirect with arguments of legality, I don't think people would have too much of a problem understanding." I have given you direct explanations as to why and how it isnt sexism or discrimination in any way, the fact you cant grasp that or refuse to or ignore it is neither my problem or me misdirecting, it is you with something you want to prove right but unfortunately (for you) you never will, you will get the same explanation from any court, legal establishment or advice bureau, in law or language there is no sexism or discrimination in what clubs are doing, if there was it would have been stopped long before now, get yourself on a crusade, go out and prove me wrong, I welcome it, although I studied for years and have followed my career for 18 years, im still very much open to learn more. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Before threatening legal action, you need to know the Equality act 2010 inside and out. I will direct you to the bit that discusses positive discrimination at PRIVATE MEMBERS CLUBS. There is a bit in it which goes something like this : "There are some people with protected characteristics who are disadvantaged or under-represented, or have particular needs linked to their characteristics. Positive action provisions in the Act enable private clubs and other associations to take proportionate steps to encourage membership among under-represented groups, or to help people overcome their disadvantages, or to meet their needs" . The steps that can be taken, include offerings discounts and concessions to these identified groups of people. To meet the criteria for the above, the Private Members club needs to advertise its pricing clearly on their website or other media for potential members to peruse prior to taking a membership. So the potential member has a choice of whether to take a membership or not and make an informed decision. The club should also be in a position to justify the pricing structure if questioned by a potential member so that they understand why they may be asked to pay more money than other members. Men and hugely over represented on the swinging scene and women are not. The above clause allows a private members club to have a different pricing structure. Throw legal stuff around all you like, but clubs can actually charge what they like if they are a PRIVATE MEMBERS club. I need to stress this as some clubs do not take membership details off people and are therefore NOT a private members club. For the record, Townhouse do not charge membership fees for anyone. We have events where guys get charged the same as everyone else and events where guys are charged more. Our pricing structure reflects the demand of each individual event. All VERY legal Firstly, having been to the Townhouse, I found it both an enjoyable and pleasant experience and have no complaints about either the club or your prices. Thanks for the clarification. I was wondering when someone would actually point that out. My argument here is not that what clubs are doing is illegal and I understand the supply and demand business model argument put forward by some and can see how it seems to make sense. My argument is that having differential prices based exclusively on the sex of the person is discrimination on the grounds of sex and, as such is sexist, whether it is legally allowed or not. Sexism goes on every day and all around us and most of the time, men come out of it positively. I don't see many discussions on here arguing about the proven fact that women still get paid less than men, that women are second rate citizens in many cultures which are prevalent in the UK, that women are bought and sold in this country. " If any of those issue were being talked about in a thread on this site and I was aware of it I would definitely comment on then and would definitely agree that the people doing it were both sexist and wrong. " Yes the argument here is guys paying more in swinging clubs...not quite the same impact as the above issues but obviously still a gripe as this is about the 4th thread on this very subject in the last month. You can call is sexism, I call it business. I do not want a club filled with guys. You know I love you all as we treat our guys with respect, but as a business, I would be shut down within the month. To avoid this happening, I take advantage of the clause in the Equality Law and use it to keep a ratio of members which sustains a play space that suits our club. This model does not work at every club and you will find that clubs across the country do things differently. " And, as you correctly point out, it's not illegal so, in a similar situation with similar business pressures, I might probably do the same. I'm not arguing that you should not do it I'm simply arguing that we should call a spade a spade and not get into some 1984, Big Brother style NewSpeak world were the meaning of words is changed to suit. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Before threatening legal action, you need to know the Equality act 2010 inside and out. I will direct you to the bit that discusses positive discrimination at PRIVATE MEMBERS CLUBS. There is a bit in it which goes something like this : "There are some people with protected characteristics who are disadvantaged or under-represented, or have particular needs linked to their characteristics. Positive action provisions in the Act enable private clubs and other associations to take proportionate steps to encourage membership among under-represented groups, or to help people overcome their disadvantages, or to meet their needs" . The steps that can be taken, include offerings discounts and concessions to these identified groups of people. To meet the criteria for the above, the Private Members club needs to advertise its pricing clearly on their website or other media for potential members to peruse prior to taking a membership. So the potential member has a choice of whether to take a membership or not and make an informed decision. The club should also be in a position to justify the pricing structure if questioned by a potential member so that they understand why they may be asked to pay more money than other members. Men and hugely over represented on the swinging scene and women are not. The above clause allows a private members club to have a different pricing structure. Throw legal stuff around all you like, but clubs can actually charge what they like if they are a PRIVATE MEMBERS club. I need to stress this as some clubs do not take membership details off people and are therefore NOT a private members club. For the record, Townhouse do not charge membership fees for anyone. We have events where guys get charged the same as everyone else and events where guys are charged more. Our pricing structure reflects the demand of each individual event. All VERY legal Firstly, having been to the Townhouse, I found it both an enjoyable and pleasant experience and have no complaints about either the club or your prices. Thanks for the clarification. I was wondering when someone would actually point that out. My argument here is not that what clubs are doing is illegal and I understand the supply and demand business model argument put forward by some and can see how it seems to make sense. My argument is that having differential prices based exclusively on the sex of the person is discrimination on the grounds of sex and, as such is sexist, whether it is legally allowed or not. if it was/is sexist it would fall foul of the law and wouldnt be allowed to happen, let alone be allowed to go on for as long as it has. Actually that's not correct. Just because the law allows this particular type of discrimination in these particular circumstances does not mean it's not discrimination or that it's not sexist or sexism. What non of you who claim it's not discrimination and sexist have done is say how it's not sexist or discrimination based on the English language definition of those words. All you seem to be saying is that, because it's not illegal it's OK. I'm not arguing about whether it's legally or OK even, I'm arguing that by any reasonable definition of the meaning of the worlds sexist, sexism and discrimination it is all three. What I'm asking those that claim it is not any of those things to do is, using the simple English definitions of those words, explain to me and anyone else how it is not all three." please, if a club was blatantly been sexist, be that a swingers club or any other type of club or establishment it would be stopped from doing it, and closed down if continued. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Before threatening legal action, you need to know the Equality act 2010 inside and out. I will direct you to the bit that discusses positive discrimination at PRIVATE MEMBERS CLUBS. There is a bit in it which goes something like this : "There are some people with protected characteristics who are disadvantaged or under-represented, or have particular needs linked to their characteristics. Positive action provisions in the Act enable private clubs and other associations to take proportionate steps to encourage membership among under-represented groups, or to help people overcome their disadvantages, or to meet their needs" . The steps that can be taken, include offerings discounts and concessions to these identified groups of people. To meet the criteria for the above, the Private Members club needs to advertise its pricing clearly on their website or other media for potential members to peruse prior to taking a membership. So the potential member has a choice of whether to take a membership or not and make an informed decision. The club should also be in a position to justify the pricing structure if questioned by a potential member so that they understand why they may be asked to pay more money than other members. Men and hugely over represented on the swinging scene and women are not. The above clause allows a private members club to have a different pricing structure. Throw legal stuff around all you like, but clubs can actually charge what they like if they are a PRIVATE MEMBERS club. I need to stress this as some clubs do not take membership details off people and are therefore NOT a private members club. For the record, Townhouse do not charge membership fees for anyone. We have events where guys get charged the same as everyone else and events where guys are charged more. Our pricing structure reflects the demand of each individual event. All VERY legal Firstly, having been to the Townhouse, I found it both an enjoyable and pleasant experience and have no complaints about either the club or your prices. Thanks for the clarification. I was wondering when someone would actually point that out. My argument here is not that what clubs are doing is illegal and I understand the supply and demand business model argument put forward by some and can see how it seems to make sense. My argument is that having differential prices based exclusively on the sex of the person is discrimination on the grounds of sex and, as such is sexist, whether it is legally allowed or not. Sexism goes on every day and all around us and most of the time, men come out of it positively. I don't see many discussions on here arguing about the proven fact that women still get paid less than men, that women are second rate citizens in many cultures which are prevalent in the UK, that women are bought and sold in this country. If any of those issue were being talked about in a thread on this site and I was aware of it I would definitely comment on then and would definitely agree that the people doing it were both sexist and wrong. Yes the argument here is guys paying more in swinging clubs...not quite the same impact as the above issues but obviously still a gripe as this is about the 4th thread on this very subject in the last month. You can call is sexism, I call it business. I do not want a club filled with guys. You know I love you all as we treat our guys with respect, but as a business, I would be shut down within the month. To avoid this happening, I take advantage of the clause in the Equality Law and use it to keep a ratio of members which sustains a play space that suits our club. This model does not work at every club and you will find that clubs across the country do things differently. And, as you correctly point out, it's not illegal so, in a similar situation with similar business pressures, I might probably do the same. I'm not arguing that you should not do it I'm simply arguing that we should call a spade a spade and not get into some 1984, Big Brother style NewSpeak world were the meaning of words is changed to suit. " no meanings of words have been changed, thats ridiculous, you cannot change meanings to get around law, it is what it is, simple pricing and discount, dont like dont go. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"We can all have our own opinion on this but if men got in free and women had to pay 30 quid there would be a riot. It's sexist pricing end of story. I get the arguments about keeping it mixed to a fair level. It is what it is. When i go to a club i will budget accordingly and hopefully have a good time. If i don't i won't go back simples. no there wouldnt be a riot, there would simply be a huge down turn in women attending turning it into a cockfest, which is why many people say if you dont like it dont go simple as that, it isnt sexist at all, an oap or a child pays half fare of a standard adult on a bus is there an outcry for ageism, no and there never has been, likewise entry to a football ground, oaps and kids pay less than me, disabled get in free, no complaints from anyone and rightly so, many competitions we enter for various things womens and under 18s entry is often half or less of that of the normal entry, and again no sexist complaints or ageist, its simply as explained above, a discount from the actual entry to entice under represented genders. I think you're kidding yourself. If you're charging a different price based on the sex of the person then you are discriminating on the grounds of sex. If you're discriminating on the grounds of sex them you are being sexist. You can't change the meaning of the English language. I am not changing the meaning of the english language, if what clubs were doing was sexist or discrimination or breaking any laws in any way do you think it would of been happening for this long, its my job to understand law in this country very well, I can assure you I am not kidding myself, it is simple discount, Example (again), The entry to get in is £30, there is more than enough single men so they dont need to discount those, therefore single men pay the full entry, however couples and women are under represented, the club want to attract more of these, so they discount the full price for couples, and discount it further for women, its not charging men more, they are simply paying the full price, the others are getting a discount. have I explained that clear enough, tell you what why dont you go to court and claim it to be sexist pricing, ill wait outside for you, and you can tell me what the court said, and how much damage the court costs did to your pocket. I'm not saying what they are doing is illegal but I am saying it is sexist and by definition discriminatory by what those words mean in the English language as in. Sexist - relating to, involving, or fostering sexism, or attitudes and behaviour toward someone based on the person's gender. Discrimination based on gender Sexism - discrimination based on a person's sex or gender Discrimination - the prejudicial or lack of preferential treatment of different categories of people, especially on the grounds of race, age, or sex. So please tell me, no matter what the business case or how legal it may be, how charging different prices for different sexes is not discrimination on the grounds of sex and as such is a sexist act and so is sexism as defined in simple English I have already explained it to you, it comes under the word discount, they are not discriminating, they are asking an entry price and then discounting it to under represented people, I cant put it any simpler, if it was discriminatory or sexist in any way, that would deem it breaking a law so it wouldnt be able to do it, yet clubs have had there entrys like this for years, I can 100% gurantee you that no court in this country would rule this pricing either discriminatory or sexist, quite simply because by language or law it isnt either of them, dont believe me, well like I said its my career, and ill wait outside any court you like while you make a fool out of yourself. Either you're deliberately using misdirection to try and confuse the issue or you're confusing what words actually mean with what may or may not be legal. Not all forms of discrimination are illegal but that does not mean that it is not discrimination. So I ask you again, how is offering different prices, whether you call it a discount or not, based on the sex of the person not discriminating on grounds of sex. Your argument on the legality of it is irrelevant to the question and I'm pretty sure that any reasonable and intelligent person, as you claim to be, knows the difference between what words mean and what is legal or illegal. ok for a start try reading that post below yours, it explains alot, and ill try to put it even simpler for you, they arent offering different prices based on gender, they arent saying we will just charge this amount because your a man or this amount because your a woman, thats the way you are looking at it, what they are doing is advertising that on that night the entry for everyone is for eg £30, but because women and couples are under represented we will put a discount on it, in order to try and attract more of those to attend, however because there are more than enough men we have no need to discount, sexism does not come into it, like ive said 3 times now, pick a court take it there, maybe you will get it when someone you can see is official explains it to you. And, like I've said at least three times or more, the legality of it is totally irrelevant to the question which, yet again you try to answer by misdirection. Words mean what they mean not what you want them to mean. If I offer a service at a different rate to people based on their sex then I am discriminating on the grounds of sex. It's not a complex legal argument it's simple English which, no matter how much you try to misdirect with arguments of legality, I don't think people would have too much of a problem understanding. I have given you direct explanations as to why and how it isnt sexism or discrimination in any way, the fact you cant grasp that or refuse to or ignore it is neither my problem or me misdirecting, it is you with something you want to prove right but unfortunately (for you) you never will, you will get the same explanation from any court, legal establishment or advice bureau, in law or language there is no sexism or discrimination in what clubs are doing, if there was it would have been stopped long before now, get yourself on a crusade, go out and prove me wrong, I welcome it, although I studied for years and have followed my career for 18 years, im still very much open to learn more." For the forth time now, I'm not talking about the law or the legality of the practice, I'm taking about the meaning of the words sexism, sexist and discrimination. People can draw their own conclusions by your constant refusal to answer the question asked, your constant use of the legality of the action to misdirect the argument and your constant attempts to make out that I do not have the intelligence or witt to understand your argument. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Before threatening legal action, you need to know the Equality act 2010 inside and out. I will direct you to the bit that discusses positive discrimination at PRIVATE MEMBERS CLUBS. There is a bit in it which goes something like this : "There are some people with protected characteristics who are disadvantaged or under-represented, or have particular needs linked to their characteristics. Positive action provisions in the Act enable private clubs and other associations to take proportionate steps to encourage membership among under-represented groups, or to help people overcome their disadvantages, or to meet their needs" . The steps that can be taken, include offerings discounts and concessions to these identified groups of people. To meet the criteria for the above, the Private Members club needs to advertise its pricing clearly on their website or other media for potential members to peruse prior to taking a membership. So the potential member has a choice of whether to take a membership or not and make an informed decision. The club should also be in a position to justify the pricing structure if questioned by a potential member so that they understand why they may be asked to pay more money than other members. Men and hugely over represented on the swinging scene and women are not. The above clause allows a private members club to have a different pricing structure. Throw legal stuff around all you like, but clubs can actually charge what they like if they are a PRIVATE MEMBERS club. I need to stress this as some clubs do not take membership details off people and are therefore NOT a private members club. For the record, Townhouse do not charge membership fees for anyone. We have events where guys get charged the same as everyone else and events where guys are charged more. Our pricing structure reflects the demand of each individual event. All VERY legal Firstly, having been to the Townhouse, I found it both an enjoyable and pleasant experience and have no complaints about either the club or your prices. Thanks for the clarification. I was wondering when someone would actually point that out. My argument here is not that what clubs are doing is illegal and I understand the supply and demand business model argument put forward by some and can see how it seems to make sense. My argument is that having differential prices based exclusively on the sex of the person is discrimination on the grounds of sex and, as such is sexist, whether it is legally allowed or not. if it was/is sexist it would fall foul of the law and wouldnt be allowed to happen, let alone be allowed to go on for as long as it has. Actually that's not correct. Just because the law allows this particular type of discrimination in these particular circumstances does not mean it's not discrimination or that it's not sexist or sexism. What non of you who claim it's not discrimination and sexist have done is say how it's not sexist or discrimination based on the English language definition of those words. All you seem to be saying is that, because it's not illegal it's OK. I'm not arguing about whether it's legally or OK even, I'm arguing that by any reasonable definition of the meaning of the worlds sexist, sexism and discrimination it is all three. What I'm asking those that claim it is not any of those things to do is, using the simple English definitions of those words, explain to me and anyone else how it is not all three. please, if a club was blatantly been sexist, be that a swingers club or any other type of club or establishment it would be stopped from doing it, and closed down if continued." No it would not. It would only be closed down if what it was doing was illegal but the fact that it is not illegal does not mean that it is not discriminatory. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
 | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Before threatening legal action, you need to know the Equality act 2010 inside and out. I will direct you to the bit that discusses positive discrimination at PRIVATE MEMBERS CLUBS. There is a bit in it which goes something like this : "There are some people with protected characteristics who are disadvantaged or under-represented, or have particular needs linked to their characteristics. Positive action provisions in the Act enable private clubs and other associations to take proportionate steps to encourage membership among under-represented groups, or to help people overcome their disadvantages, or to meet their needs" . The steps that can be taken, include offerings discounts and concessions to these identified groups of people. To meet the criteria for the above, the Private Members club needs to advertise its pricing clearly on their website or other media for potential members to peruse prior to taking a membership. So the potential member has a choice of whether to take a membership or not and make an informed decision. The club should also be in a position to justify the pricing structure if questioned by a potential member so that they understand why they may be asked to pay more money than other members. Men and hugely over represented on the swinging scene and women are not. The above clause allows a private members club to have a different pricing structure. Throw legal stuff around all you like, but clubs can actually charge what they like if they are a PRIVATE MEMBERS club. I need to stress this as some clubs do not take membership details off people and are therefore NOT a private members club. For the record, Townhouse do not charge membership fees for anyone. We have events where guys get charged the same as everyone else and events where guys are charged more. Our pricing structure reflects the demand of each individual event. All VERY legal Firstly, having been to the Townhouse, I found it both an enjoyable and pleasant experience and have no complaints about either the club or your prices. Thanks for the clarification. I was wondering when someone would actually point that out. My argument here is not that what clubs are doing is illegal and I understand the supply and demand business model argument put forward by some and can see how it seems to make sense. My argument is that having differential prices based exclusively on the sex of the person is discrimination on the grounds of sex and, as such is sexist, whether it is legally allowed or not. Sexism goes on every day and all around us and most of the time, men come out of it positively. I don't see many discussions on here arguing about the proven fact that women still get paid less than men, that women are second rate citizens in many cultures which are prevalent in the UK, that women are bought and sold in this country. If any of those issue were being talked about in a thread on this site and I was aware of it I would definitely comment on then and would definitely agree that the people doing it were both sexist and wrong. Yes the argument here is guys paying more in swinging clubs...not quite the same impact as the above issues but obviously still a gripe as this is about the 4th thread on this very subject in the last month. You can call is sexism, I call it business. I do not want a club filled with guys. You know I love you all as we treat our guys with respect, but as a business, I would be shut down within the month. To avoid this happening, I take advantage of the clause in the Equality Law and use it to keep a ratio of members which sustains a play space that suits our club. This model does not work at every club and you will find that clubs across the country do things differently. And, as you correctly point out, it's not illegal so, in a similar situation with similar business pressures, I might probably do the same. I'm not arguing that you should not do it I'm simply arguing that we should call a spade a spade and not get into some 1984, Big Brother style NewSpeak world were the meaning of words is changed to suit. no meanings of words have been changed, thats ridiculous, you cannot change meanings to get around law, it is what it is, simple pricing and discount, dont like dont go." I never said I didn't like but I do say it is sexist, sexism and discriminatory. The only way you can possibly argue that charging different prices based on the sex of a person is not discrimination on the grounds of sex is to change the meaning of the word discriminate. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Based on the dictionary definition of sexism, swinging clubs tend to be sexist as they offer incentives to women and couples to use the club. Yes we are sexist! Is that what you want to hear? Lets charge guys the same as everyone else, frighten away the girls that don't like to be overwhelmed with guys, frighten away the couples who don't like to be outnumbered and we'll all sit around the bar admiring each others masculinity! lol I can tell you now, that guys will also start complaining that they are less likely to meet a lady/couple for a play as there is much more 'competition'. You can say that you like to socialise at a swingers club, but lets face it, you guys are there for the same thing as us girls and a social at every visit will soon become boring. This sexist model of charging guys more works in swingers clubs. It keeps the girls/couples coming in and results in a good night for ALL. For all the guys who want a non sexist approach to swinging, you better start holding your own parties, because the clubs will be closing down under a non sexist model. " I think you may have got the impression that I am being critical of either you guys personally or your club. I'm not. I like the Townhouse and plan on going back there again in the near future (if you'll still have me. ).
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Before threatening legal action, you need to know the Equality act 2010 inside and out. I will direct you to the bit that discusses positive discrimination at PRIVATE MEMBERS CLUBS. There is a bit in it which goes something like this : "There are some people with protected characteristics who are disadvantaged or under-represented, or have particular needs linked to their characteristics. Positive action provisions in the Act enable private clubs and other associations to take proportionate steps to encourage membership among under-represented groups, or to help people overcome their disadvantages, or to meet their needs" . The steps that can be taken, include offerings discounts and concessions to these identified groups of people. To meet the criteria for the above, the Private Members club needs to advertise its pricing clearly on their website or other media for potential members to peruse prior to taking a membership. So the potential member has a choice of whether to take a membership or not and make an informed decision. The club should also be in a position to justify the pricing structure if questioned by a potential member so that they understand why they may be asked to pay more money than other members. Men and hugely over represented on the swinging scene and women are not. The above clause allows a private members club to have a different pricing structure. Throw legal stuff around all you like, but clubs can actually charge what they like if they are a PRIVATE MEMBERS club. I need to stress this as some clubs do not take membership details off people and are therefore NOT a private members club. For the record, Townhouse do not charge membership fees for anyone. We have events where guys get charged the same as everyone else and events where guys are charged more. Our pricing structure reflects the demand of each individual event. All VERY legal Firstly, having been to the Townhouse, I found it both an enjoyable and pleasant experience and have no complaints about either the club or your prices. Thanks for the clarification. I was wondering when someone would actually point that out. My argument here is not that what clubs are doing is illegal and I understand the supply and demand business model argument put forward by some and can see how it seems to make sense. My argument is that having differential prices based exclusively on the sex of the person is discrimination on the grounds of sex and, as such is sexist, whether it is legally allowed or not. Sexism goes on every day and all around us and most of the time, men come out of it positively. I don't see many discussions on here arguing about the proven fact that women still get paid less than men, that women are second rate citizens in many cultures which are prevalent in the UK, that women are bought and sold in this country. If any of those issue were being talked about in a thread on this site and I was aware of it I would definitely comment on then and would definitely agree that the people doing it were both sexist and wrong. Yes the argument here is guys paying more in swinging clubs...not quite the same impact as the above issues but obviously still a gripe as this is about the 4th thread on this very subject in the last month. You can call is sexism, I call it business. I do not want a club filled with guys. You know I love you all as we treat our guys with respect, but as a business, I would be shut down within the month. To avoid this happening, I take advantage of the clause in the Equality Law and use it to keep a ratio of members which sustains a play space that suits our club. This model does not work at every club and you will find that clubs across the country do things differently. And, as you correctly point out, it's not illegal so, in a similar situation with similar business pressures, I might probably do the same. I'm not arguing that you should not do it I'm simply arguing that we should call a spade a spade and not get into some 1984, Big Brother style NewSpeak world were the meaning of words is changed to suit. no meanings of words have been changed, thats ridiculous, you cannot change meanings to get around law, it is what it is, simple pricing and discount, dont like dont go. I never said I didn't like but I do say it is sexist, sexism and discriminatory. The only way you can possibly argue that charging different prices based on the sex of a person is not discrimination on the grounds of sex is to change the meaning of the word discriminate." no it isnt, I have given you explanations as to why and how it isnt discrimination or sexism, I have given you other examples in other walks of life as to how exact or very similar things happen and arent ddiscrimination or sexism, if you cant/wont understand that then that is your problem, but continually claiming it to be things it isnt wont change it to those things. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I never said I didn't like but I do say it is sexist, sexism and discriminatory. The only way you can possibly argue that charging different prices based on the sex of a person is not discrimination on the grounds of sex is to change the meaning of the word discriminate." As has been said several times above, if you want to use the word discrimination fair enough, but add the word positive in front of it. It is not discrimination against the single male, but positive discrimination for the single female and couple ie a discount to get them to attend. Couples prices are usually significantly higher on couples only events - the club does not need to offer a discount on those nights. You appear to be arguing purely over semantics. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"This is what the Equality & Human Rights Commission website has to say on private members' clubs and discrimination: ['When services are provided to you by a private members’ club of which you are a member, the club is not bound by the Sex Discrimination Act as a service provider and can lawfully discriminate on grounds of gender.... '] ['A private members’ club is one that genuinely selects its members on personal grounds, rather than, for example, accepting as a member anyone who pays the membership fee.'] In my view, the first para supports the notion that swingers clubs are not doing anything illegal, but the second para throws a spanner in the works as I'm pretty sure most swingers clubs accept anyone who pays a membership fee, and might therefore be found by a court to be a 'service provider' and in breach of the Sexual Discrimination Act. In short, I'd say that most swingers clubs would have a case to answer, but that's only going to happen if a private individual pursues it in court. Sorry, had some time on my hands "by law a private swingers club ran this way has no case to answer, they arent breaching any laws, they arent discriminating and they arent been sexist, no court in the land would entertain it, ive no doubt some do breach some laws but the pricing structure isnt one of them. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Before threatening legal action, you need to know the Equality act 2010 inside and out. I will direct you to the bit that discusses positive discrimination at PRIVATE MEMBERS CLUBS. There is a bit in it which goes something like this : "There are some people with protected characteristics who are disadvantaged or under-represented, or have particular needs linked to their characteristics. Positive action provisions in the Act enable private clubs and other associations to take proportionate steps to encourage membership among under-represented groups, or to help people overcome their disadvantages, or to meet their needs" . The steps that can be taken, include offerings discounts and concessions to these identified groups of people. To meet the criteria for the above, the Private Members club needs to advertise its pricing clearly on their website or other media for potential members to peruse prior to taking a membership. So the potential member has a choice of whether to take a membership or not and make an informed decision. The club should also be in a position to justify the pricing structure if questioned by a potential member so that they understand why they may be asked to pay more money than other members. Men and hugely over represented on the swinging scene and women are not. The above clause allows a private members club to have a different pricing structure. Throw legal stuff around all you like, but clubs can actually charge what they like if they are a PRIVATE MEMBERS club. I need to stress this as some clubs do not take membership details off people and are therefore NOT a private members club. For the record, Townhouse do not charge membership fees for anyone. We have events where guys get charged the same as everyone else and events where guys are charged more. Our pricing structure reflects the demand of each individual event. All VERY legal Firstly, having been to the Townhouse, I found it both an enjoyable and pleasant experience and have no complaints about either the club or your prices. Thanks for the clarification. I was wondering when someone would actually point that out. My argument here is not that what clubs are doing is illegal and I understand the supply and demand business model argument put forward by some and can see how it seems to make sense. My argument is that having differential prices based exclusively on the sex of the person is discrimination on the grounds of sex and, as such is sexist, whether it is legally allowed or not. if it was/is sexist it would fall foul of the law and wouldnt be allowed to happen, let alone be allowed to go on for as long as it has. Actually that's not correct. Just because the law allows this particular type of discrimination in these particular circumstances does not mean it's not discrimination or that it's not sexist or sexism. What non of you who claim it's not discrimination and sexist have done is say how it's not sexist or discrimination based on the English language definition of those words. All you seem to be saying is that, because it's not illegal it's OK. I'm not arguing about whether it's legally or OK even, I'm arguing that by any reasonable definition of the meaning of the worlds sexist, sexism and discrimination it is all three. What I'm asking those that claim it is not any of those things to do is, using the simple English definitions of those words, explain to me and anyone else how it is not all three. please, if a club was blatantly been sexist, be that a swingers club or any other type of club or establishment it would be stopped from doing it, and closed down if continued. No it would not. It would only be closed down if what it was doing was illegal but the fact that it is not illegal does not mean that it is not discriminatory." my god you are akin to a dog with a bone, if a club is been blatantly sexist it is breaching its laws/agreements/rules whatever you want to call it, and would be dealt with, continuous breach of this would result in closure, do you want to come to my office and ill take you through the relevant information on this lol. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I never said I didn't like but I do say it is sexist, sexism and discriminatory. The only way you can possibly argue that charging different prices based on the sex of a person is not discrimination on the grounds of sex is to change the meaning of the word discriminate. As has been said several times above, if you want to use the word discrimination fair enough, but add the word positive in front of it. It is not discrimination against the single male, but positive discrimination for the single female and couple ie a discount to get them to attend. Couples prices are usually significantly higher on couples only events - the club does not need to offer a discount on those nights. You appear to be arguing purely over semantics. " I agree, it is mostly semantic but it is still discrimination whether positive or not and language is always just semantics anyhow. Maybe you should point this out to Adventurousus! | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"This is what the Equality & Human Rights Commission website has to say on private members' clubs and discrimination: ['When services are provided to you by a private members’ club of which you are a member, the club is not bound by the Sex Discrimination Act as a service provider and can lawfully discriminate on grounds of gender.... '] ['A private members’ club is one that genuinely selects its members on personal grounds, rather than, for example, accepting as a member anyone who pays the membership fee.'] In my view, the first para supports the notion that swingers clubs are not doing anything illegal, but the second para throws a spanner in the works as I'm pretty sure most swingers clubs accept anyone who pays a membership fee, and might therefore be found by a court to be a 'service provider' and in breach of the Sexual Discrimination Act. In short, I'd say that most swingers clubs would have a case to answer, but that's only going to happen if a private individual pursues it in court. Sorry, had some time on my hands
by law a private swingers club ran this way has no case to answer, they arent breaching any laws, they arent discriminating and they arent been sexist, no court in the land would entertain it, ive no doubt some do breach some laws but the pricing structure isnt one of them."Well, yes they are discriminating. The question is whether they are breaking any discrimination laws by doing so. Only a test-case could answer this. My point was that some swingers clubs might have a hard time proving in court that they are a genuine private members club (which according to the EHRC means they would have to prove they don't accept just anyone who stumps up the membership fee). | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"We can all have our own opinion on this but if men got in free and women had to pay 30 quid there would be a riot. It's sexist pricing end of story. I get the arguments about keeping it mixed to a fair level. It is what it is. When i go to a club i will budget accordingly and hopefully have a good time. If i don't i won't go back simples. no there wouldnt be a riot, there would simply be a huge down turn in women attending turning it into a cockfest, which is why many people say if you dont like it dont go simple as that, it isnt sexist at all, an oap or a child pays half fare of a standard adult on a bus is there an outcry for ageism, no and there never has been, likewise entry to a football ground, oaps and kids pay less than me, disabled get in free, no complaints from anyone and rightly so, many competitions we enter for various things womens and under 18s entry is often half or less of that of the normal entry, and again no sexist complaints or ageist, its simply as explained above, a discount from the actual entry to entice under represented genders. I think you're kidding yourself. If you're charging a different price based on the sex of the person then you are discriminating on the grounds of sex. If you're discriminating on the grounds of sex them you are being sexist. You can't change the meaning of the English language. I am not changing the meaning of the english language, if what clubs were doing was sexist or discrimination or breaking any laws in any way do you think it would of been happening for this long, its my job to understand law in this country very well, I can assure you I am not kidding myself, it is simple discount, Example (again), The entry to get in is £30, there is more than enough single men so they dont need to discount those, therefore single men pay the full entry, however couples and women are under represented, the club want to attract more of these, so they discount the full price for couples, and discount it further for women, its not charging men more, they are simply paying the full price, the others are getting a discount. have I explained that clear enough, tell you what why dont you go to court and claim it to be sexist pricing, ill wait outside for you, and you can tell me what the court said, and how much damage the court costs did to your pocket. I'm not saying what they are doing is illegal but I am saying it is sexist and by definition discriminatory by what those words mean in the English language as in. Sexist - relating to, involving, or fostering sexism, or attitudes and behaviour toward someone based on the person's gender. Discrimination based on gender Sexism - discrimination based on a person's sex or gender Discrimination - the prejudicial or lack of preferential treatment of different categories of people, especially on the grounds of race, age, or sex. So please tell me, no matter what the business case or how legal it may be, how charging different prices for different sexes is not discrimination on the grounds of sex and as such is a sexist act and so is sexism as defined in simple English I have already explained it to you, it comes under the word discount, they are not discriminating, they are asking an entry price and then discounting it to under represented people, I cant put it any simpler, if it was discriminatory or sexist in any way, that would deem it breaking a law so it wouldnt be able to do it, yet clubs have had there entrys like this for years, I can 100% gurantee you that no court in this country would rule this pricing either discriminatory or sexist, quite simply because by language or law it isnt either of them, dont believe me, well like I said its my career, and ill wait outside any court you like while you make a fool out of yourself. Either you're deliberately using misdirection to try and confuse the issue or you're confusing what words actually mean with what may or may not be legal. Not all forms of discrimination are illegal but that does not mean that it is not discrimination. So I ask you again, how is offering different prices, whether you call it a discount or not, based on the sex of the person not discriminating on grounds of sex. Your argument on the legality of it is irrelevant to the question and I'm pretty sure that any reasonable and intelligent person, as you claim to be, knows the difference between what words mean and what is legal or illegal. ok for a start try reading that post below yours, it explains alot, and ill try to put it even simpler for you, they arent offering different prices based on gender, they arent saying we will just charge this amount because your a man or this amount because your a woman, thats the way you are looking at it, what they are doing is advertising that on that night the entry for everyone is for eg £30, but because women and couples are under represented we will put a discount on it, in order to try and attract more of those to attend, however because there are more than enough men we have no need to discount, sexism does not come into it, like ive said 3 times now, pick a court take it there, maybe you will get it when someone you can see is official explains it to you. And, like I've said at least three times or more, the legality of it is totally irrelevant to the question which, yet again you try to answer by misdirection. Words mean what they mean not what you want them to mean. If I offer a service at a different rate to people based on their sex then I am discriminating on the grounds of sex. It's not a complex legal argument it's simple English which, no matter how much you try to misdirect with arguments of legality, I don't think people would have too much of a problem understanding. I have given you direct explanations as to why and how it isnt sexism or discrimination in any way, the fact you cant grasp that or refuse to or ignore it is neither my problem or me misdirecting, it is you with something you want to prove right but unfortunately (for you) you never will, you will get the same explanation from any court, legal establishment or advice bureau, in law or language there is no sexism or discrimination in what clubs are doing, if there was it would have been stopped long before now, get yourself on a crusade, go out and prove me wrong, I welcome it, although I studied for years and have followed my career for 18 years, im still very much open to learn more. For the forth time now, I'm not talking about the law or the legality of the practice, I'm taking about the meaning of the words sexism, sexist and discrimination. People can draw their own conclusions by your constant refusal to answer the question asked, your constant use of the legality of the action to misdirect the argument and your constant attempts to make out that I do not have the intelligence or witt to understand your argument. " I have answered your question a number of times, you refuse to get it or cant get it, I have not tried to insult your intelligence, quite the contrary in that I have 18 years in practising law and you are insulting me in telling me im wrong on certain things ive said regarding law. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"This is what the Equality & Human Rights Commission website has to say on private members' clubs and discrimination: ['When services are provided to you by a private members’ club of which you are a member, the club is not bound by the Sex Discrimination Act as a service provider and can lawfully discriminate on grounds of gender.... '] ['A private members’ club is one that genuinely selects its members on personal grounds, rather than, for example, accepting as a member anyone who pays the membership fee.'] In my view, the first para supports the notion that swingers clubs are not doing anything illegal, but the second para throws a spanner in the works as I'm pretty sure most swingers clubs accept anyone who pays a membership fee, and might therefore be found by a court to be a 'service provider' and in breach of the Sexual Discrimination Act. In short, I'd say that most swingers clubs would have a case to answer, but that's only going to happen if a private individual pursues it in court. Sorry, had some time on my hands
by law a private swingers club ran this way has no case to answer, they arent breaching any laws, they arent discriminating and they arent been sexist, no court in the land would entertain it, ive no doubt some do breach some laws but the pricing structure isnt one of them.
Well, yes they are discriminating. The question is whether they are breaking any discrimination laws by doing so. Only a test-case could answer this. My point was that some swingers clubs might have a hard time proving in court that they are a genuine private members club (which according to the EHRC means they would have to prove they don't accept just anyone who stumps up the membership fee)."they are not breaking any discriminating laws therefore not discriminating it really is as simple as that, if they were to say turn membership away on the grounds of someone's gender then they would fall foul of discriminating, giving a discount is neither discriminatory or sexist. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I agree, it is mostly semantic " No, your arguements now are totally semantic. You just want someone to say discrimination instead of discount when both words are referring to the same thing. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I never said I didn't like but I do say it is sexist, sexism and discriminatory. The only way you can possibly argue that charging different prices based on the sex of a person is not discrimination on the grounds of sex is to change the meaning of the word discriminate. As has been said several times above, if you want to use the word discrimination fair enough, but add the word positive in front of it. It is not discrimination against the single male, but positive discrimination for the single female and couple ie a discount to get them to attend. Couples prices are usually significantly higher on couples only events - the club does not need to offer a discount on those nights. You appear to be arguing purely over semantics. I agree, it is mostly semantic but it is still discrimination whether positive or not and language is always just semantics anyhow. Maybe you should point this out to Adventurousus!" I do not need this pointing out, you however clearly need a better understanding of language and law. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Before threatening legal action, you need to know the Equality act 2010 inside and out. I will direct you to the bit that discusses positive discrimination at PRIVATE MEMBERS CLUBS. There is a bit in it which goes something like this : "There are some people with protected characteristics who are disadvantaged or under-represented, or have particular needs linked to their characteristics. Positive action provisions in the Act enable private clubs and other associations to take proportionate steps to encourage membership among under-represented groups, or to help people overcome their disadvantages, or to meet their needs" . The steps that can be taken, include offerings discounts and concessions to these identified groups of people. To meet the criteria for the above, the Private Members club needs to advertise its pricing clearly on their website or other media for potential members to peruse prior to taking a membership. So the potential member has a choice of whether to take a membership or not and make an informed decision. The club should also be in a position to justify the pricing structure if questioned by a potential member so that they understand why they may be asked to pay more money than other members. Men and hugely over represented on the swinging scene and women are not. The above clause allows a private members club to have a different pricing structure. Throw legal stuff around all you like, but clubs can actually charge what they like if they are a PRIVATE MEMBERS club. I need to stress this as some clubs do not take membership details off people and are therefore NOT a private members club. For the record, Townhouse do not charge membership fees for anyone. We have events where guys get charged the same as everyone else and events where guys are charged more. Our pricing structure reflects the demand of each individual event. All VERY legal Firstly, having been to the Townhouse, I found it both an enjoyable and pleasant experience and have no complaints about either the club or your prices. Thanks for the clarification. I was wondering when someone would actually point that out. My argument here is not that what clubs are doing is illegal and I understand the supply and demand business model argument put forward by some and can see how it seems to make sense. My argument is that having differential prices based exclusively on the sex of the person is discrimination on the grounds of sex and, as such is sexist, whether it is legally allowed or not. Sexism goes on every day and all around us and most of the time, men come out of it positively. I don't see many discussions on here arguing about the proven fact that women still get paid less than men, that women are second rate citizens in many cultures which are prevalent in the UK, that women are bought and sold in this country. If any of those issue were being talked about in a thread on this site and I was aware of it I would definitely comment on then and would definitely agree that the people doing it were both sexist and wrong. Yes the argument here is guys paying more in swinging clubs...not quite the same impact as the above issues but obviously still a gripe as this is about the 4th thread on this very subject in the last month. You can call is sexism, I call it business. I do not want a club filled with guys. You know I love you all as we treat our guys with respect, but as a business, I would be shut down within the month. To avoid this happening, I take advantage of the clause in the Equality Law and use it to keep a ratio of members which sustains a play space that suits our club. This model does not work at every club and you will find that clubs across the country do things differently. And, as you correctly point out, it's not illegal so, in a similar situation with similar business pressures, I might probably do the same. I'm not arguing that you should not do it I'm simply arguing that we should call a spade a spade and not get into some 1984, Big Brother style NewSpeak world were the meaning of words is changed to suit. no meanings of words have been changed, thats ridiculous, you cannot change meanings to get around law, it is what it is, simple pricing and discount, dont like dont go. I never said I didn't like but I do say it is sexist, sexism and discriminatory. The only way you can possibly argue that charging different prices based on the sex of a person is not discrimination on the grounds of sex is to change the meaning of the word discriminate. no it isnt, I have given you explanations as to why and how it isnt discrimination or sexism, I have given you other examples in other walks of life as to how exact or very similar things happen and arent ddiscrimination or sexism, if you cant/wont understand that then that is your problem, but continually claiming it to be things it isnt wont change it to those things." Actually you have not given me any explanations as to why it is not sexism or discrimination you have only given me reasons as to why it's not illegal which is not the question I am asking you. Let's define discrimination again, so we are all totally clear what it means Discrimination - the prejudicial or lack of preferential treatment of different categories of people, especially on the grounds of race, age, or sex. Offering a discount to women that is not available to men is clearly both prejudicial to man and also lacking in preferential treatment to men and therefor is clearly discrimination on the grounds of sex. If you can clearly explain to me how it is not discrimination by that simple definition then I'll accept that. However just saying that it is not illegal does not answer the question and I think you'll find that even those who agree with this pricing structure can see that. And, fore the record, I'm not totally opposed to using this pricing structure either. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I never said I didn't like but I do say it is sexist, sexism and discriminatory. The only way you can possibly argue that charging different prices based on the sex of a person is not discrimination on the grounds of sex is to change the meaning of the word discriminate. As has been said several times above, if you want to use the word discrimination fair enough, but add the word positive in front of it. It is not discrimination against the single male, but positive discrimination for the single female and couple ie a discount to get them to attend. Couples prices are usually significantly higher on couples only events - the club does not need to offer a discount on those nights. You appear to be arguing purely over semantics. I agree, it is mostly semantic but it is still discrimination whether positive or not and language is always just semantics anyhow. Maybe you should point this out to Adventurousus! I do not need this pointing out, you however clearly need a better understanding of language and law." Your understanding of the law in this area may well be better than mine but your understanding of simple English seems to rather less good. Which is why I'm guessing you keep quoting the law rather than answering the question asked. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Also as you can clearly see I am in agreement with most on this thread, you are the dog with the bone trying in vain to prove your theorys." I think that, whilst most of this thread does not believe that the pricing structure is wrong, something that I have never said by the way, most seem able to accept that it is discriminatory even if some call is positive discrimination. Misdirection seldom works well when used against people who are well used to seeing it. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I never said I didn't like but I do say it is sexist, sexism and discriminatory. The only way you can possibly argue that charging different prices based on the sex of a person is not discrimination on the grounds of sex is to change the meaning of the word discriminate. As has been said several times above, if you want to use the word discrimination fair enough, but add the word positive in front of it. It is not discrimination against the single male, but positive discrimination for the single female and couple ie a discount to get them to attend. Couples prices are usually significantly higher on couples only events - the club does not need to offer a discount on those nights. You appear to be arguing purely over semantics. I agree, it is mostly semantic but it is still discrimination whether positive or not and language is always just semantics anyhow. Maybe you should point this out to Adventurousus! I do not need this pointing out, you however clearly need a better understanding of language and law. Your understanding of the law in this area may well be better than mine but your understanding of simple English seems to rather less good. Which is why I'm guessing you keep quoting the law rather than answering the question asked." as I previously said I have answered your questions numerous times, maybe its time to put that bone down instead of inventing things that arent there. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Before threatening legal action, you need to know the Equality act 2010 inside and out. I will direct you to the bit that discusses positive discrimination at PRIVATE MEMBERS CLUBS. There is a bit in it which goes something like this : "There are some people with protected characteristics who are disadvantaged or under-represented, or have particular needs linked to their characteristics. Positive action provisions in the Act enable private clubs and other associations to take proportionate steps to encourage membership among under-represented groups, or to help people overcome their disadvantages, or to meet their needs" . The steps that can be taken, include offerings discounts and concessions to these identified groups of people. To meet the criteria for the above, the Private Members club needs to advertise its pricing clearly on their website or other media for potential members to peruse prior to taking a membership. So the potential member has a choice of whether to take a membership or not and make an informed decision. The club should also be in a position to justify the pricing structure if questioned by a potential member so that they understand why they may be asked to pay more money than other members. Men and hugely over represented on the swinging scene and women are not. The above clause allows a private members club to have a different pricing structure. Throw legal stuff around all you like, but clubs can actually charge what they like if they are a PRIVATE MEMBERS club. I need to stress this as some clubs do not take membership details off people and are therefore NOT a private members club. For the record, Townhouse do not charge membership fees for anyone. We have events where guys get charged the same as everyone else and events where guys are charged more. Our pricing structure reflects the demand of each individual event. All VERY legal Firstly, having been to the Townhouse, I found it both an enjoyable and pleasant experience and have no complaints about either the club or your prices. Thanks for the clarification. I was wondering when someone would actually point that out. My argument here is not that what clubs are doing is illegal and I understand the supply and demand business model argument put forward by some and can see how it seems to make sense. My argument is that having differential prices based exclusively on the sex of the person is discrimination on the grounds of sex and, as such is sexist, whether it is legally allowed or not. Sexism goes on every day and all around us and most of the time, men come out of it positively. I don't see many discussions on here arguing about the proven fact that women still get paid less than men, that women are second rate citizens in many cultures which are prevalent in the UK, that women are bought and sold in this country. If any of those issue were being talked about in a thread on this site and I was aware of it I would definitely comment on then and would definitely agree that the people doing it were both sexist and wrong. Yes the argument here is guys paying more in swinging clubs...not quite the same impact as the above issues but obviously still a gripe as this is about the 4th thread on this very subject in the last month. You can call is sexism, I call it business. I do not want a club filled with guys. You know I love you all as we treat our guys with respect, but as a business, I would be shut down within the month. To avoid this happening, I take advantage of the clause in the Equality Law and use it to keep a ratio of members which sustains a play space that suits our club. This model does not work at every club and you will find that clubs across the country do things differently. And, as you correctly point out, it's not illegal so, in a similar situation with similar business pressures, I might probably do the same. I'm not arguing that you should not do it I'm simply arguing that we should call a spade a spade and not get into some 1984, Big Brother style NewSpeak world were the meaning of words is changed to suit. no meanings of words have been changed, thats ridiculous, you cannot change meanings to get around law, it is what it is, simple pricing and discount, dont like dont go. I never said I didn't like but I do say it is sexist, sexism and discriminatory. The only way you can possibly argue that charging different prices based on the sex of a person is not discrimination on the grounds of sex is to change the meaning of the word discriminate. no it isnt, I have given you explanations as to why and how it isnt discrimination or sexism, I have given you other examples in other walks of life as to how exact or very similar things happen and arent ddiscrimination or sexism, if you cant/wont understand that then that is your problem, but continually claiming it to be things it isnt wont change it to those things. Actually you have not given me any explanations as to why it is not sexism or discrimination you have only given me reasons as to why it's not illegal which is not the question I am asking you. Let's define discrimination again, so we are all totally clear what it means Discrimination - the prejudicial or lack of preferential treatment of different categories of people, especially on the grounds of race, age, or sex. Offering a discount to women that is not available to men is clearly both prejudicial to man and also lacking in preferential treatment to men and therefor is clearly discrimination on the grounds of sex. If you can clearly explain to me how it is not discrimination by that simple definition then I'll accept that. However just saying that it is not illegal does not answer the question and I think you'll find that even those who agree with this pricing structure can see that. And, fore the record, I'm not totally opposed to using this pricing structure either." ok going over it again, using english, giving a discount to one but not another in any walk of life be it man, woman, dog or anything does not make it discrimination or sexist if you dont give it to another, there is no rule, law or language that states if one person gets a discount then everyone else must get one aswell, if that was the case every pub, supermarket, nightclub, cinema, restaurant, bus company, train company, holiday company etc would deemed as discriminatory and sexist in language and law. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I never said I didn't like but I do say it is sexist, sexism and discriminatory. The only way you can possibly argue that charging different prices based on the sex of a person is not discrimination on the grounds of sex is to change the meaning of the word discriminate. As has been said several times above, if you want to use the word discrimination fair enough, but add the word positive in front of it. It is not discrimination against the single male, but positive discrimination for the single female and couple ie a discount to get them to attend. Couples prices are usually significantly higher on couples only events - the club does not need to offer a discount on those nights. You appear to be arguing purely over semantics. I agree, it is mostly semantic but it is still discrimination whether positive or not and language is always just semantics anyhow. Maybe you should point this out to Adventurousus! I do not need this pointing out, you however clearly need a better understanding of language and law. Your understanding of the law in this area may well be better than mine but your understanding of simple English seems to rather less good. Which is why I'm guessing you keep quoting the law rather than answering the question asked. as I previously said I have answered your questions numerous times, maybe its time to put that bone down instead of inventing things that arent there." Know you haven't and you know you haven't but if you really think you have you can cut and paste it back in here again quite easily. I'm guessing you'll just cut and paste the answer you gave before about it not being illegal even though you know full well that is not the question being asked or simply claim that you have already answered when you know you actually have not. More misdirection, more refusal to answer and more personal attacks on the person asking rather than answer the question. Stop being evasive and just answer the question asked not the one you would like to have been asked. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Before threatening legal action, you need to know the Equality act 2010 inside and out. I will direct you to the bit that discusses positive discrimination at PRIVATE MEMBERS CLUBS. There is a bit in it which goes something like this : "There are some people with protected characteristics who are disadvantaged or under-represented, or have particular needs linked to their characteristics. Positive action provisions in the Act enable private clubs and other associations to take proportionate steps to encourage membership among under-represented groups, or to help people overcome their disadvantages, or to meet their needs" . The steps that can be taken, include offerings discounts and concessions to these identified groups of people. To meet the criteria for the above, the Private Members club needs to advertise its pricing clearly on their website or other media for potential members to peruse prior to taking a membership. So the potential member has a choice of whether to take a membership or not and make an informed decision. The club should also be in a position to justify the pricing structure if questioned by a potential member so that they understand why they may be asked to pay more money than other members. Men and hugely over represented on the swinging scene and women are not. The above clause allows a private members club to have a different pricing structure. Throw legal stuff around all you like, but clubs can actually charge what they like if they are a PRIVATE MEMBERS club. I need to stress this as some clubs do not take membership details off people and are therefore NOT a private members club. For the record, Townhouse do not charge membership fees for anyone. We have events where guys get charged the same as everyone else and events where guys are charged more. Our pricing structure reflects the demand of each individual event. All VERY legal Firstly, having been to the Townhouse, I found it both an enjoyable and pleasant experience and have no complaints about either the club or your prices. Thanks for the clarification. I was wondering when someone would actually point that out. My argument here is not that what clubs are doing is illegal and I understand the supply and demand business model argument put forward by some and can see how it seems to make sense. My argument is that having differential prices based exclusively on the sex of the person is discrimination on the grounds of sex and, as such is sexist, whether it is legally allowed or not. Sexism goes on every day and all around us and most of the time, men come out of it positively. I don't see many discussions on here arguing about the proven fact that women still get paid less than men, that women are second rate citizens in many cultures which are prevalent in the UK, that women are bought and sold in this country. If any of those issue were being talked about in a thread on this site and I was aware of it I would definitely comment on then and would definitely agree that the people doing it were both sexist and wrong. Yes the argument here is guys paying more in swinging clubs...not quite the same impact as the above issues but obviously still a gripe as this is about the 4th thread on this very subject in the last month. You can call is sexism, I call it business. I do not want a club filled with guys. You know I love you all as we treat our guys with respect, but as a business, I would be shut down within the month. To avoid this happening, I take advantage of the clause in the Equality Law and use it to keep a ratio of members which sustains a play space that suits our club. This model does not work at every club and you will find that clubs across the country do things differently. And, as you correctly point out, it's not illegal so, in a similar situation with similar business pressures, I might probably do the same. I'm not arguing that you should not do it I'm simply arguing that we should call a spade a spade and not get into some 1984, Big Brother style NewSpeak world were the meaning of words is changed to suit. no meanings of words have been changed, thats ridiculous, you cannot change meanings to get around law, it is what it is, simple pricing and discount, dont like dont go. I never said I didn't like but I do say it is sexist, sexism and discriminatory. The only way you can possibly argue that charging different prices based on the sex of a person is not discrimination on the grounds of sex is to change the meaning of the word discriminate. no it isnt, I have given you explanations as to why and how it isnt discrimination or sexism, I have given you other examples in other walks of life as to how exact or very similar things happen and arent ddiscrimination or sexism, if you cant/wont understand that then that is your problem, but continually claiming it to be things it isnt wont change it to those things. Actually you have not given me any explanations as to why it is not sexism or discrimination you have only given me reasons as to why it's not illegal which is not the question I am asking you. Let's define discrimination again, so we are all totally clear what it means Discrimination - the prejudicial or lack of preferential treatment of different categories of people, especially on the grounds of race, age, or sex. Offering a discount to women that is not available to men is clearly both prejudicial to man and also lacking in preferential treatment to men and therefor is clearly discrimination on the grounds of sex. If you can clearly explain to me how it is not discrimination by that simple definition then I'll accept that. However just saying that it is not illegal does not answer the question and I think you'll find that even those who agree with this pricing structure can see that. And, fore the record, I'm not totally opposed to using this pricing structure either. ok going over it again, using english, giving a discount to one but not another in any walk of life be it man, woman, dog or anything does not make it discrimination or sexist if you dont give it to another, there is no rule, law or language that states if one person gets a discount then everyone else must get one aswell, if that was the case every pub, supermarket, nightclub, cinema, restaurant, bus company, train company, holiday company etc would deemed as discriminatory and sexist in language and law." You keep banking on about the law. This is not about the law it's about the meaning of words. I have given you a clear definition of what the word discrimination actually means and a clear example of a situation. All you have to do is to say how that situation does not exactly fit the definition of the word discrimination and you can't. You just keep on refereeing back to the law on discrimination. That's still not answering the question. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"it is purely a business decision you can argue its not sexist it is more status discrimination as single fems pay less than couples who pay less than single males. this happens in every day life as OAPs and students get more discount at places than normal people. you have the choice as to whether you visit a club or not." I totally agree. I would also say that discrimination is not always or even mostly wrong. I personally discriminate on the grounds of their sex every time I choose a partner. Nothing wrong with that. Charging different prices for women, couples and men may, whilst not being so clear cut, also not necessarily be wrong. I've never said it is but to try to argue that it is not discrimination when it clearly is is just wrong. Let's call a spade a spade and not try to avoid the issue with semantics. It's perfectly defendable discrimination and many on here have defended it well. What is not either arguable or defensible in any reasonable way is to try and say that it is not discrimination. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Being rather naïve on this subject ,I would hazard a guess that if clubs reduced the cost of entry for single guys the following might happen To many single guys = uncomfortable single women and couples . Cheap entry , guys just turn up with no etiquette of manners or have made the effort And finally most single guys can hide a tenner entry to a club from there partners " Agree about cheap entry, just any blokes will turn up totally clueless and disrespectful, looking for a shag. But on the flipside, charge guys too much and they may expect something in return for the high entry price.... | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"trying to work out whether you are this much a dog with a bone and wont let go till everyone says "oh silly us, we were wrong!" or whether you just want the last word...... *just thinking out loud... don't answer it*" PMSFL. -- don't answer it. That's just not fair. 
I would have answered privately put I'm blocked as a single guy from messaging you.
In answer, whether you want it or not:- You should know from other threads we have come across each other on, normally on the same side of the argument, that I give up when either people stop telling me I'm wrong when I don't think I am, when others convince me that I am wrong, as Sexybum did on the environment thread the other day, or when I get too annoyed with a thread to argue reasonably. Simples | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Being rather naïve on this subject ,I would hazard a guess that if clubs reduced the cost of entry for single guys the following might happen To many single guys = uncomfortable single women and couples . Cheap entry , guys just turn up with no etiquette of manners or have made the effort And finally most single guys can hide a tenner entry to a club from there partners Agree about cheap entry, just any blokes will turn up totally clueless and disrespectful, looking for a shag. " Possibly " But on the flipside, charge guys too much and they may expect something in return for the high entry price...." Probably | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I never said I didn't like but I do say it is sexist, sexism and discriminatory. The only way you can possibly argue that charging different prices based on the sex of a person is not discrimination on the grounds of sex is to change the meaning of the word discriminate. As has been said several times above, if you want to use the word discrimination fair enough, but add the word positive in front of it. It is not discrimination against the single male, but positive discrimination for the single female and couple ie a discount to get them to attend. Couples prices are usually significantly higher on couples only events - the club does not need to offer a discount on those nights. You appear to be arguing purely over semantics. I agree, it is mostly semantic but it is still discrimination whether positive or not and language is always just semantics anyhow. Maybe you should point this out to Adventurousus! I do not need this pointing out, you however clearly need a better understanding of language and law. Your understanding of the law in this area may well be better than mine but your understanding of simple English seems to rather less good. Which is why I'm guessing you keep quoting the law rather than answering the question asked. as I previously said I have answered your questions numerous times, maybe its time to put that bone down instead of inventing things that arent there. Know you haven't and you know you haven't but if you really think you have you can cut and paste it back in here again quite easily. I'm guessing you'll just cut and paste the answer you gave before about it not being illegal even though you know full well that is not the question being asked or simply claim that you have already answered when you know you actually have not. More misdirection, more refusal to answer and more personal attacks on the person asking rather than answer the question. Stop being evasive and just answer the question asked not the one you would like to have been asked." are you still going, again because you cant or wont take an answer doesnt mean I havent answered it numerous times, I have never been evasive or personally attacked you. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Of course it is discrimination and of course it's sexist. Just not illegal "ok then that works perfectly fine. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"trying to work out whether you are this much a dog with a bone and wont let go till everyone says "oh silly us, we were wrong!" or whether you just want the last word...... *just thinking out loud... don't answer it*" | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Of course it is discrimination and of course it's sexist. Just not illegal
ok then that works perfectly fine."QED | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"it is purely a business decision you can argue its not sexist it is more status discrimination as single fems pay less than couples who pay less than single males. this happens in every day life as OAPs and students get more discount at places than normal people. you have the choice as to whether you visit a club or not. I totally agree. I would also say that discrimination is not always or even mostly wrong. I personally discriminate on the grounds of their sex every time I choose a partner. Nothing wrong with that. Charging different prices for women, couples and men may, whilst not being so clear cut, also not necessarily be wrong. I've never said it is but to try to argue that it is not discrimination when it clearly is is just wrong. Let's call a spade a spade and not try to avoid the issue with semantics. It's perfectly defendable discrimination and many on here have defended it well. What is not either arguable or defensible in any reasonable way is to try and say that it is not discrimination. " again giving a discount isnt and never will be discrimination, the reason you see or think of it as discrimination is you look at it as charging men more than others, the fact that makes it not discrimination is that they are giving a discount to under represented people, it is not discriminatory for someone to pay the entry price and someone else to get a discount. if I get a voucher for a discounted pizza from my local take away but my neighbour doesnt, are they discriminated against, no they arent. Giving a discount is not discrimination. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"it is purely a business decision you can argue its not sexist it is more status discrimination as single fems pay less than couples who pay less than single males. this happens in every day life as OAPs and students get more discount at places than normal people. you have the choice as to whether you visit a club or not. I totally agree. I would also say that discrimination is not always or even mostly wrong. I personally discriminate on the grounds of their sex every time I choose a partner. Nothing wrong with that. Charging different prices for women, couples and men may, whilst not being so clear cut, also not necessarily be wrong. I've never said it is but to try to argue that it is not discrimination when it clearly is is just wrong. Let's call a spade a spade and not try to avoid the issue with semantics. It's perfectly defendable discrimination and many on here have defended it well. What is not either arguable or defensible in any reasonable way is to try and say that it is not discrimination. again giving a discount isnt and never will be discrimination, the reason you see or think of it as discrimination is you look at it as charging men more than others, the fact that makes it not discrimination is that they are giving a discount to under represented people, it is not discriminatory for someone to pay the entry price and someone else to get a discount. if I get a voucher for a discounted pizza from my local take away but my neighbour doesnt, are they discriminated against, no they arent. Giving a discount is not discrimination. " Actually, if the pizza place was offering the discount only to one gender, they would be guilty of sexual discrimination - which is why they wouldn't dream of doing it | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"it is purely a business decision you can argue its not sexist it is more status discrimination as single fems pay less than couples who pay less than single males. this happens in every day life as OAPs and students get more discount at places than normal people. you have the choice as to whether you visit a club or not. I totally agree. I would also say that discrimination is not always or even mostly wrong. I personally discriminate on the grounds of their sex every time I choose a partner. Nothing wrong with that. Charging different prices for women, couples and men may, whilst not being so clear cut, also not necessarily be wrong. I've never said it is but to try to argue that it is not discrimination when it clearly is is just wrong. Let's call a spade a spade and not try to avoid the issue with semantics. It's perfectly defendable discrimination and many on here have defended it well. What is not either arguable or defensible in any reasonable way is to try and say that it is not discrimination. again giving a discount isnt and never will be discrimination, the reason you see or think of it as discrimination is you look at it as charging men more than others, the fact that makes it not discrimination is that they are giving a discount to under represented people, it is not discriminatory for someone to pay the entry price and someone else to get a discount. if I get a voucher for a discounted pizza from my local take away but my neighbour doesnt, are they discriminated against, no they arent. Giving a discount is not discrimination. Actually, if the pizza place was offering the discount only to one gender, they would be guilty of sexual discrimination - which is why they wouldn't dream of doing it "yes but they arent and neither are clubs, they are expecting some that want to attend to pay the entry fee and offering discounts to the under represented factions to try and attract them in. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"it is purely a business decision you can argue its not sexist it is more status discrimination as single fems pay less than couples who pay less than single males. this happens in every day life as OAPs and students get more discount at places than normal people. you have the choice as to whether you visit a club or not. I totally agree. I would also say that discrimination is not always or even mostly wrong. I personally discriminate on the grounds of their sex every time I choose a partner. Nothing wrong with that. Charging different prices for women, couples and men may, whilst not being so clear cut, also not necessarily be wrong. I've never said it is but to try to argue that it is not discrimination when it clearly is is just wrong. Let's call a spade a spade and not try to avoid the issue with semantics. It's perfectly defendable discrimination and many on here have defended it well. What is not either arguable or defensible in any reasonable way is to try and say that it is not discrimination. again giving a discount isnt and never will be discrimination, the reason you see or think of it as discrimination is you look at it as charging men more than others, the fact that makes it not discrimination is that they are giving a discount to under represented people, it is not discriminatory for someone to pay the entry price and someone else to get a discount. if I get a voucher for a discounted pizza from my local take away but my neighbour doesnt, are they discriminated against, no they arent. Giving a discount is not discrimination. Actually, if the pizza place was offering the discount only to one gender, they would be guilty of sexual discrimination - which is why they wouldn't dream of doing it
yes but they arent and neither are clubs, they are expecting some that want to attend to pay the entry fee and offering discounts to the under represented factions to try and attract them in."But you already agreed with StevenAndDebs that it is discrimination just not illegal. Now you're going back to your non sequitur argument that discrimination is not discrimination if it's not illegal. Can you not see how fallacious that argument is. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Actually our local pizza place gives a 20% discount to people who work for the NHS...if your not an NHS worker you pay full price. So are they discriminating against people who don't work for the NHS or merely encouranging business by offering incentives?" This is my last post on the subject, promise The Equality Act 2010 is concered with nine 'Protected Characteristics': Age, Disability, Gender reassignment, Marriage & Civil partnership, Pregnancy & maternity, Race, Religion & belief, Sex (Gender) and Sexual orientation. So the NHS discount would not be breaking any equality laws. And there are exceptions in the Act, such as discounts for OAPs, and Students etc, which are considered acceptable.
That's me out | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"it is purely a business decision you can argue its not sexist it is more status discrimination as single fems pay less than couples who pay less than single males. this happens in every day life as OAPs and students get more discount at places than normal people. you have the choice as to whether you visit a club or not. I totally agree. I would also say that discrimination is not always or even mostly wrong. I personally discriminate on the grounds of their sex every time I choose a partner. Nothing wrong with that. Charging different prices for women, couples and men may, whilst not being so clear cut, also not necessarily be wrong. I've never said it is but to try to argue that it is not discrimination when it clearly is is just wrong. Let's call a spade a spade and not try to avoid the issue with semantics. It's perfectly defendable discrimination and many on here have defended it well. What is not either arguable or defensible in any reasonable way is to try and say that it is not discrimination. again giving a discount isnt and never will be discrimination, the reason you see or think of it as discrimination is you look at it as charging men more than others, the fact that makes it not discrimination is that they are giving a discount to under represented people, it is not discriminatory for someone to pay the entry price and someone else to get a discount. if I get a voucher for a discounted pizza from my local take away but my neighbour doesnt, are they discriminated against, no they arent. Giving a discount is not discrimination. Actually, if the pizza place was offering the discount only to one gender, they would be guilty of sexual discrimination - which is why they wouldn't dream of doing it
yes but they arent and neither are clubs, they are expecting some that want to attend to pay the entry fee and offering discounts to the under represented factions to try and attract them in.
But you already agreed with StevenAndDebs that it is discrimination just not illegal. Now you're going back to your non sequitur argument that discrimination is not discrimination if it's not illegal. Can you not see how fallacious that argument is."inventing things again, and read the comment above yours an excellent example, I have never argued discrimination is not discrimination, ive simply explained to you how a clubs pricing policy is not discrimination to which even with all the reasons and examples put to you, you still somehow dont/cant/wont get it. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Actually our local pizza place gives a 20% discount to people who work for the NHS...if your not an NHS worker you pay full price. So are they discriminating against people who don't work for the NHS or merely encouranging business by offering incentives? This is my last post on the subject, promise The Equality Act 2010 is concered with nine 'Protected Characteristics': Age, Disability, Gender reassignment, Marriage & Civil partnership, Pregnancy & maternity, Race, Religion & belief, Sex (Gender) and Sexual orientation. So the NHS discount would not be breaking any equality laws. And there are exceptions in the Act, such as discounts for OAPs, and Students etc, which are considered acceptable.
That's me out "oh but law has nothing to do with it apparently. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Actually our local pizza place gives a 20% discount to people who work for the NHS...if your not an NHS worker you pay full price. So are they discriminating against people who don't work for the NHS or merely encouranging business by offering incentives?" They are discriminating in favour of those who work in the NHS and against those that don't. Is it illegal? No. Is it wrong? No. Is it discrimination? YES | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Actually our local pizza place gives a 20% discount to people who work for the NHS...if your not an NHS worker you pay full price. So are they discriminating against people who don't work for the NHS or merely encouranging business by offering incentives? They are discriminating in favour of those who work in the NHS and against those that don't. Is it illegal? No. Is it wrong? No. Is it discrimination? YES" Same then? I have already said clubs are sexist...not going to change how they operate I'm afraid otherwise the whole club culture will collapse | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"it is purely a business decision you can argue its not sexist it is more status discrimination as single fems pay less than couples who pay less than single males. this happens in every day life as OAPs and students get more discount at places than normal people. you have the choice as to whether you visit a club or not. I totally agree. I would also say that discrimination is not always or even mostly wrong. I personally discriminate on the grounds of their sex every time I choose a partner. Nothing wrong with that. Charging different prices for women, couples and men may, whilst not being so clear cut, also not necessarily be wrong. I've never said it is but to try to argue that it is not discrimination when it clearly is is just wrong. Let's call a spade a spade and not try to avoid the issue with semantics. It's perfectly defendable discrimination and many on here have defended it well. What is not either arguable or defensible in any reasonable way is to try and say that it is not discrimination. again giving a discount isnt and never will be discrimination, the reason you see or think of it as discrimination is you look at it as charging men more than others, the fact that makes it not discrimination is that they are giving a discount to under represented people, it is not discriminatory for someone to pay the entry price and someone else to get a discount. if I get a voucher for a discounted pizza from my local take away but my neighbour doesnt, are they discriminated against, no they arent. Giving a discount is not discrimination. Actually, if the pizza place was offering the discount only to one gender, they would be guilty of sexual discrimination - which is why they wouldn't dream of doing it
yes but they arent and neither are clubs, they are expecting some that want to attend to pay the entry fee and offering discounts to the under represented factions to try and attract them in.
But you already agreed with StevenAndDebs that it is discrimination just not illegal. Now you're going back to your non sequitur argument that discrimination is not discrimination if it's not illegal. Can you not see how fallacious that argument is.
inventing things again, and read the comment above yours an excellent example, I have never argued discrimination is not discrimination, ive simply explained to you how a clubs pricing policy is not discrimination to which even with all the reasons and examples put to you, you still somehow dont/cant/wont get it."I don't get it because it's not true and does not sense in simple English. Discrimination is treating one person or group of people differently than another person or group. In this particular definition we are talking about discrimination on the grounds of race, sex or religion. If you charge one person more or less than another you are discriminating between them. If the reason you are discriminating between them is because of there sex then that is sexual discrimination. You don't have to be an expert in discrimination law to be able to follow that. Where you are probably right is that it is not illegal discrimination under the law but it's still discrimination in English. You can't change the meaning of the word just to suit your point. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Actually our local pizza place gives a 20% discount to people who work for the NHS...if your not an NHS worker you pay full price. So are they discriminating against people who don't work for the NHS or merely encouranging business by offering incentives? They are discriminating in favour of those who work in the NHS and against those that don't. Is it illegal? No. Is it wrong? No. Is it discrimination? YES" Of course they arent discriminating, they are showing appreciation, offering rewards, incentives, drumming up business, but certainly not discriminating, if they were saying no one else can have pizza apart from nhs staff that would be discrimination, theres a world of difference, you have a weird mind, and see things only in your theorys, with your way of thinking the whole country are discriminating against each other all the time. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"it is purely a business decision you can argue its not sexist it is more status discrimination as single fems pay less than couples who pay less than single males. this happens in every day life as OAPs and students get more discount at places than normal people. you have the choice as to whether you visit a club or not. I totally agree. I would also say that discrimination is not always or even mostly wrong. I personally discriminate on the grounds of their sex every time I choose a partner. Nothing wrong with that. Charging different prices for women, couples and men may, whilst not being so clear cut, also not necessarily be wrong. I've never said it is but to try to argue that it is not discrimination when it clearly is is just wrong. Let's call a spade a spade and not try to avoid the issue with semantics. It's perfectly defendable discrimination and many on here have defended it well. What is not either arguable or defensible in any reasonable way is to try and say that it is not discrimination. again giving a discount isnt and never will be discrimination, the reason you see or think of it as discrimination is you look at it as charging men more than others, the fact that makes it not discrimination is that they are giving a discount to under represented people, it is not discriminatory for someone to pay the entry price and someone else to get a discount. if I get a voucher for a discounted pizza from my local take away but my neighbour doesnt, are they discriminated against, no they arent. Giving a discount is not discrimination. Actually, if the pizza place was offering the discount only to one gender, they would be guilty of sexual discrimination - which is why they wouldn't dream of doing it
yes but they arent and neither are clubs, they are expecting some that want to attend to pay the entry fee and offering discounts to the under represented factions to try and attract them in.
But you already agreed with StevenAndDebs that it is discrimination just not illegal. Now you're going back to your non sequitur argument that discrimination is not discrimination if it's not illegal. Can you not see how fallacious that argument is.
inventing things again, and read the comment above yours an excellent example, I have never argued discrimination is not discrimination, ive simply explained to you how a clubs pricing policy is not discrimination to which even with all the reasons and examples put to you, you still somehow dont/cant/wont get it.
I don't get it because it's not true and does not sense in simple English. Discrimination is treating one person or group of people differently than another person or group. In this particular definition we are talking about discrimination on the grounds of race, sex or religion. If you charge one person more or less than another you are discriminating between them. If the reason you are discriminating between them is because of there sex then that is sexual discrimination. You don't have to be an expert in discrimination law to be able to follow that.
Where you are probably right is that it is not illegal discrimination under the law but it's still discrimination in English. You can't change the meaning of the word just to suit your point."im not, you are changing many things to suit your theorys. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Actually our local pizza place gives a 20% discount to people who work for the NHS...if your not an NHS worker you pay full price. So are they discriminating against people who don't work for the NHS or merely encouranging business by offering incentives? They are discriminating in favour of those who work in the NHS and against those that don't. Is it illegal? No. Is it wrong? No. Is it discrimination? YES Same then? I have already said clubs are sexist...not going to change how they operate I'm afraid otherwise the whole club culture will collapse" I think this whole thread has moved away from whether clubs should or shouldn't charge different rates for men, woman and couples and seems to be bogged down in an attempt to redefine the English language. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
 | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"it is purely a business decision you can argue its not sexist it is more status discrimination as single fems pay less than couples who pay less than single males. this happens in every day life as OAPs and students get more discount at places than normal people. you have the choice as to whether you visit a club or not. I totally agree. I would also say that discrimination is not always or even mostly wrong. I personally discriminate on the grounds of their sex every time I choose a partner. Nothing wrong with that. Charging different prices for women, couples and men may, whilst not being so clear cut, also not necessarily be wrong. I've never said it is but to try to argue that it is not discrimination when it clearly is is just wrong. Let's call a spade a spade and not try to avoid the issue with semantics. It's perfectly defendable discrimination and many on here have defended it well. What is not either arguable or defensible in any reasonable way is to try and say that it is not discrimination. again giving a discount isnt and never will be discrimination, the reason you see or think of it as discrimination is you look at it as charging men more than others, the fact that makes it not discrimination is that they are giving a discount to under represented people, it is not discriminatory for someone to pay the entry price and someone else to get a discount. if I get a voucher for a discounted pizza from my local take away but my neighbour doesnt, are they discriminated against, no they arent. Giving a discount is not discrimination. Actually, if the pizza place was offering the discount only to one gender, they would be guilty of sexual discrimination - which is why they wouldn't dream of doing it
yes but they arent and neither are clubs, they are expecting some that want to attend to pay the entry fee and offering discounts to the under represented factions to try and attract them in.
But you already agreed with StevenAndDebs that it is discrimination just not illegal. Now you're going back to your non sequitur argument that discrimination is not discrimination if it's not illegal. Can you not see how fallacious that argument is.
inventing things again, and read the comment above yours an excellent example, I have never argued discrimination is not discrimination, ive simply explained to you how a clubs pricing policy is not discrimination to which even with all the reasons and examples put to you, you still somehow dont/cant/wont get it.
I don't get it because it's not true and does not sense in simple English. Discrimination is treating one person or group of people differently than another person or group. In this particular definition we are talking about discrimination on the grounds of race, sex or religion. If you charge one person more or less than another you are discriminating between them. If the reason you are discriminating between them is because of there sex then that is sexual discrimination. You don't have to be an expert in discrimination law to be able to follow that.
Where you are probably right is that it is not illegal discrimination under the law but it's still discrimination in English. You can't change the meaning of the word just to suit your point.
im not, you are changing many things to suit your theorys."What have I changed to suit my theory. I don't even have a theory on this. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Actually our local pizza place gives a 20% discount to people who work for the NHS...if your not an NHS worker you pay full price. So are they discriminating against people who don't work for the NHS or merely encouranging business by offering incentives? They are discriminating in favour of those who work in the NHS and against those that don't. Is it illegal? No. Is it wrong? No. Is it discrimination? YES Same then? I have already said clubs are sexist...not going to change how they operate I'm afraid otherwise the whole club culture will collapse I think this whole thread has moved away from whether clubs should or shouldn't charge different rates for men, woman and couples and seems to be bogged down in an attempt to redefine the English language." stop trying to redefine it then. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"it is purely a business decision you can argue its not sexist it is more status discrimination as single fems pay less than couples who pay less than single males. this happens in every day life as OAPs and students get more discount at places than normal people. you have the choice as to whether you visit a club or not. I totally agree. I would also say that discrimination is not always or even mostly wrong. I personally discriminate on the grounds of their sex every time I choose a partner. Nothing wrong with that. Charging different prices for women, couples and men may, whilst not being so clear cut, also not necessarily be wrong. I've never said it is but to try to argue that it is not discrimination when it clearly is is just wrong. Let's call a spade a spade and not try to avoid the issue with semantics. It's perfectly defendable discrimination and many on here have defended it well. What is not either arguable or defensible in any reasonable way is to try and say that it is not discrimination. again giving a discount isnt and never will be discrimination, the reason you see or think of it as discrimination is you look at it as charging men more than others, the fact that makes it not discrimination is that they are giving a discount to under represented people, it is not discriminatory for someone to pay the entry price and someone else to get a discount. if I get a voucher for a discounted pizza from my local take away but my neighbour doesnt, are they discriminated against, no they arent. Giving a discount is not discrimination. Actually, if the pizza place was offering the discount only to one gender, they would be guilty of sexual discrimination - which is why they wouldn't dream of doing it
yes but they arent and neither are clubs, they are expecting some that want to attend to pay the entry fee and offering discounts to the under represented factions to try and attract them in.
But you already agreed with StevenAndDebs that it is discrimination just not illegal. Now you're going back to your non sequitur argument that discrimination is not discrimination if it's not illegal. Can you not see how fallacious that argument is.
inventing things again, and read the comment above yours an excellent example, I have never argued discrimination is not discrimination, ive simply explained to you how a clubs pricing policy is not discrimination to which even with all the reasons and examples put to you, you still somehow dont/cant/wont get it.
I don't get it because it's not true and does not sense in simple English. Discrimination is treating one person or group of people differently than another person or group. In this particular definition we are talking about discrimination on the grounds of race, sex or religion. If you charge one person more or less than another you are discriminating between them. If the reason you are discriminating between them is because of there sex then that is sexual discrimination. You don't have to be an expert in discrimination law to be able to follow that.
Where you are probably right is that it is not illegal discrimination under the law but it's still discrimination in English. You can't change the meaning of the word just to suit your point.
im not, you are changing many things to suit your theorys.
What have I changed to suit my theory. I don't even have a theory on this."your theory's on the whole country discriminating against eachother everyday. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"A question .....don't most clubs limit single men entering a club anyway? So what difference does it make that they are charged more?" Not sure as I wouldn't pay | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
""Man: Ah. I'd like to have an argument, please. Receptionist: Certainly sir. Have you been here before? Man: No, this is my first time. Receptionist: I see. Well, do you want to have the full argument, or were you thinking of taking a course?" I hope it's not the fecking course "I had this thought a couple of hours ago...... | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Ok that didnt make sense so will try again.....if single men are limited to how many can enter the club, then why do they need to be charged more? " Because, apparently, clubs have to offer a discount to couples and single women so that enough of them will attend. Men get charged more to cover the lost revenue because, apparently, men will pay anything for the chance of an easy fuck. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Ok that didnt make sense so will try again.....if single men are limited to how many can enter the club, then why do they need to be charged more? Because, apparently, clubs have to offer a discount to couples and single women so that enough of them will attend. Men get charged more to cover the lost revenue because, apparently, men will pay anything for the chance of an easy fuck. " lol thanks but I was more puzzled as to why some clubs say they charge more and because they dont want to be over run by single males.....and then some limit the amount of men who enter anyway....you can still limit the amount of men by charging a less amount? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"A question .....don't most clubs limit single men entering a club anyway? So what difference does it make that they are charged more?" not all clubs do on all nights... some will limit guys on different nights depending on who that particular night is aimed at.... so for example they wont limit of on a greedy girls or a mixed night... but they might on a mixed night primarily aimed at couples.... to say that clubs limit on all nights isn't ture | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" lol thanks but I was more puzzled as to why some clubs say they charge more and because they dont want to be over run by single males.....and then some limit the amount of men who enter anyway....you can still limit the amount of men by charging a less amount?" Perhaps because those clubs would rather not openly admit that they have to change single men more to subsidise discount for the customers they really want? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"A question .....don't most clubs limit single men entering a club anyway? So what difference does it make that they are charged more? not all clubs do on all nights... some will limit guys on different nights depending on who that particular night is aimed at.... so for example they wont limit of on a greedy girls or a mixed night... but they might on a mixed night primarily aimed at couples.... to say that clubs limit on all nights isn't ture" I didnt say clubs limit on all nights | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" lol thanks but I was more puzzled as to why some clubs say they charge more and because they dont want to be over run by single males.....and then some limit the amount of men who enter anyway....you can still limit the amount of men by charging a less amount? Perhaps because those clubs would rather not openly admit that they have to change single men more to subsidise discount for the customers they really want? " Possibly.....hopefully someone from a club will answer | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"A question .....don't most clubs limit single men entering a club anyway? So what difference does it make that they are charged more? not all clubs do on all nights... some will limit guys on different nights depending on who that particular night is aimed at.... so for example they wont limit of on a greedy girls or a mixed night... but they might on a mixed night primarily aimed at couples.... to say that clubs limit on all nights isn't ture I didnt say clubs limit on all nights" i never said that you did... but i am saying it is not as widespread as the people who like to complain about it would have you believe..... | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"it is purely a business decision you can argue its not sexist it is more status discrimination as single fems pay less than couples who pay less than single males. this happens in every day life as OAPs and students get more discount at places than normal people. you have the choice as to whether you visit a club or not. I totally agree. I would also say that discrimination is not always or even mostly wrong. I personally discriminate on the grounds of their sex every time I choose a partner. Nothing wrong with that. Charging different prices for women, couples and men may, whilst not being so clear cut, also not necessarily be wrong. I've never said it is but to try to argue that it is not discrimination when it clearly is is just wrong. Let's call a spade a spade and not try to avoid the issue with semantics. It's perfectly defendable discrimination and many on here have defended it well. What is not either arguable or defensible in any reasonable way is to try and say that it is not discrimination. again giving a discount isnt and never will be discrimination, the reason you see or think of it as discrimination is you look at it as charging men more than others, the fact that makes it not discrimination is that they are giving a discount to under represented people, it is not discriminatory for someone to pay the entry price and someone else to get a discount. if I get a voucher for a discounted pizza from my local take away but my neighbour doesnt, are they discriminated against, no they arent. Giving a discount is not discrimination. Actually, if the pizza place was offering the discount only to one gender, they would be guilty of sexual discrimination - which is why they wouldn't dream of doing it
yes but they arent and neither are clubs, they are expecting some that want to attend to pay the entry fee and offering discounts to the under represented factions to try and attract them in.
But you already agreed with StevenAndDebs that it is discrimination just not illegal. Now you're going back to your non sequitur argument that discrimination is not discrimination if it's not illegal. Can you not see how fallacious that argument is."I agree; It is discrimination. It is just that the discrimination in this case is legal; and you have pointed this out correctly too Just like it is discrimination to allow a wheelchair user far more space on a bus than a non-disabled person but still charge them both exactly the same fare. It is discrimination based on the basis of a characteristic just as swinging clubs discriminate based on the basis of gender Most men discriminate based on gender too. They mostly discriminate against other men by not having sex with them I don't hear the gays complaining. OK, that is an example too far-fetched as the men are not a private-members club | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
