Oh this is just rich: Intent on appealing the $5,700 discrimination judgment against them after denying gay couple Martyn Hall and Steven Preddy a room at their Chymorvah Private Hotel, owners Peter and Hazelmary Bull might have a new friend.
A new lawsuit from a different gay couple says they too were refused board for being gay. Michael Black, 63, and John Morgan, 58, who have been together for seven years, say they were turned away in March from Swiss B&B in Cookham, Berkshire.
Along with her husband Francis, the B&B’s owner Susanne Wilkinson the couple claims, said “it is against my convictions for two men to share a bed,” especially because “this is my private home.” Black, who booked the room online, says Wilkinson “said she was sorry and she was polite in a cold way and she was not abusive, so we asked our money back and she gave it to us.”
In return, they gave her a lawsuit. Have fun you guys. And no running in the halls!
Why do we force these issues? I have no desire to stay in a B&B, have a party at a church, welcome. Why would I want them to eat in a restaurant etc. where I am not wanted.
The more we fight these bigots, the bigger the chance they move in on us. Do we want to lose our male and female only resorts in places like Key West, Ptown, Palm Springs etc? I have no desire to hang out at the pool with some breeders and their kids, playing a christian radio station.
I hate discrimination, but I also feel that small B&B’s and resorts should get some leaway on whom they market to. When we get the right to stay at places like these, we LOSE the right to have Gay only places
okay, this “it is my private home” shit wont work. private homes don’t have to obey the safety regs, health and safety inspections, food hygiene inspections etc that these people have to do by force of law. presumably non-smoking rules also apply, which don’t apply to private households. and if they’re just a private home they’re obviously not systematically *charging* people to stay? and so they wouldn’t have to pay tax either then?
either you’re a business or you’re not. no ones holding a gun to your head making you run a hotel. quit or obey the law. or open your doors free to all married christians — or is that a christian charitable act too far?
@JAW: if people didn’t force issues they’d still be sitting on the back of busses; building pyramids; under jack boots of totalitarian regimes.
some people have to get they’re hands dirty in order that you can recline in key west, ptown, palm springs, etc. and may i venture the opinion your sooo worth the effort.
I’m curious, would a gay resort actually turn away a straight couple? I suppose it’s happened at some point, but in general I think these resorts would do no such thing. In my mind it’s a false equivalent.
What exactly would be the problem if they did?
Sorry Bruno… do a google for the cities then perhaps add “male only” and call and make a reservation for you and your wife. Then perhaps add something like seeing if they have a special rate for kids.
Also there are plenty of campgrounds, bath houses etc that are either male only or female only.
There are plenty of businesses that cater to male only or female only. I do not want to lose the right to go to theses places, so if a small B&B that does not want me, I’ll live.
Please do some research before you say something is false
This is what needs to continue. If you choose to discriminate, you have also chosen to be sued, and lose in court, and lose the support of your business in the public eye. Either obey the law, or don’t run your business. It’s very simple. And no, JAW, I don’t see this instantly turning against us. Mostly because the gay couples aren’t doing anything wrong, and because if people go to a hotel or resort that is knowingly catering to gay/lesbian folk, just to harass, then that is much different than just wanting a place to stay with your partner. Most of these people are trying their damndest to run away from us, not run closer to us.
Francis, I am not suggesting that the straight couple would go to harass us, my point is, that if a woman wanted to hang out a pool that is clothing optional, because she likes to see naked men, The resort would need to allow here. This may cause the resort to lose business, or perhaps close.
Again, I hate discrimination, but I do make sure when I make reservations to stay at Known Gay friendly places. I do not want to give money to people that hate me or hate that I was born Gay.
If you’re turning your home into a business, it must be open to the public. It’s that simple. It’s not illegal to be gay, so they shouldn’t have any say.
@JAW: you’re making false comparisons. for instance, if a gay man went to a heterosexual brothel and demanded to have his needs serviced too, clearly that would be unreasonable to expect that of such a business. by definition it’s not set up to be able to comply.
or more prosaically, male and female bathrooms/changing rooms, its deemed reasonable to discriminate. it’s down to reasonable expectations.
similarly a gay mans spa or resort regardless of the ostensible reason given for its existence, its raison d’être is in fact to meet other gay guys with the expectation of sex, or to foster homosocial relationships. so it’s not unreasonable to exclude women. but only in such limited cases. again its down to reasonableness.
the unreasonableness in these christians complaint, that their faith is somehow under attack, is self-evident in the fact that they would still be christians while the gays stayed — no one would revoke their christian permit or force them to kneel before a golden phallus; they could even register disapproval should they wish to; its even a wonderful (and entirely lawful) opportunity to preach at the gays and ask them to abstain from their abominable sex — but they cant demand it. and when the gays settle their bills and leave, they’ll still be christians. they lose exactly nothing.
Divkid… If you can show me laws that say that it is ok to exclude women, straights or others from Gay resorts and “spas” I will agree with you.
Public accommodations should be open to all, or should have exclusion by the owners. Back in the 1960’s Blacks were excluded, so the laws were changed to be open to all.
If a small B&B can’t exclude who they want as guests, in the building where they live 24/7/365, then we will lose the right to do the same at our resorts.
As for the brothel line. A straight man could walk in and look for a blue eyed blond and they can say, sorry here area ll who are available, If a gay man walked in,,, they could say the same.
and unless you are in Nevada, brothels are illegal in the USA… so report them.
If they can exclude us, then we can exclude them…. I can live with that
No. 11 · JAW wrote, “If they can exclude us, then we can exclude them…. I can live with that” … if you think for it a bit more, you’ll realize you can’t live with that. Suppose a gay couple decides to go the Shakespeare Festival in Ashland Oregon, and is told that they can’t stay together (either they get separate rooms at roughly twice the cost or they have to drive to Portland each night, a one-way distance of roughly 200 miles). Meanwhile, if a straight couple is not allowed in a gay hotel, there would almost certainly be a straight-only hotel pretty close.
Such an arrangement causes far more inconvenience for gays than for straights on the average because there would nearly always be far few gay facilities.
If you don’t want to rent a room to a gay couple, there is a legal way to do that. The legal way is, don’t offer to rent a room, at all. If you offer to rent a room, at all, you cannot pick and choose to whom you will rent it.
This has been established in UK law very firmly, and is explicit in the Equality Act. Sexual orientation is a protected characteristic under that act. The problem is likely, that a lot of people don’t know that discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation is prohibited.
The gays will win the lawsuit, I am sure. The news programs will talk about it, and then more people will know that such discrimination is prohibited, and there will be fewer violations.
@JAW asked, “Why would I want them to eat in a restaurant etc. where I am not wanted.”
The issue with public accommodations is not whether anyone would choose to stay in a place where they are not made to feel welcome. The issue is that, in many places, there is only one inn. If you need to stay in that place, for work perhaps, then you don’t have a choice, and you need to stay in that inn.
Likewise, if there is only one restaurant, you need to be allowed to eat there. If there is only one gas station, and your car needs gas, then you need to be able to buy gas. It is just not right to require people to walk dozens of miles to buy fuel, food, or a bed for the night.
So while most people avoid going to places where they are not welcome, some people don’t have that choice. If you job takes you to a place, you should be as welcome as anyone else.
The slippery slope you’re invoking can’t cross the Atlantic. The First Amendment of the US Constitution would apply in the US, but the UK’s analog of a system of fundamental precepts is a much hazier and more flexible amalgam.
Sceth, I am not sure of how your laws in the UK work, but here in the US the First Amendment is about freedom of speech. The civil rights laws take care of public accommodations. Sadly the federal laws do not cover sexual orientation. Many states do offer protection, you would need to check the state where you have issues.
Again, I do believe that discrimination is wrong, BUT there are many times and places, where we LGBT folks do it.
@Sceth: You are first, assuming that all gays, when going on vacation, want to go to some vapid vacation spot like Palm Springs or Key West to ogle naked guys (some of us actually want a family friendly vacation where we can get some culture). You are also assuming that gays would care if a straight woman was at the pool. One woman is going to put a damper on your cruising? Really? How do you manage in gay bars? You are lastly, acting like gay getaways are just getting a free pass when they do deny straight couples, when they are not, they get sued just as quickly as straight-run establishments do.
I apologize, that previous comment was supposed to be @JAW, not @Sceth.
“This is my private home.”
Not if you’re renting it out, dumbass.
I do not assume anything. I, and sounds like you, spend most of of leisure time doing basic ordinary things. I live in the east coast metroplex that includes all the area from NYC, Philly and DC. I go on vacation to the islands and don not need a gay resort or bar to have fun. I have never stayed at a clothing optional resort, nor do I plan on it.
My feelings are… That I am glad that those resorts are available to those men that enjoy them. There are many gay owned and gay friendly B&B’s out there that would love us to stay with them.
We have choices, Times have changed. There are web sites that list plenty of gay and gay friendly places to stay. I do research to make sure I am traveling to gay friendly places.
Laws can force people to allow us to stay at their B&B or hotel, but why would we want to support them when they will always hate us.
We will never get everyone to like us so we should support those that do
@JAW: Why can’t it be both? Why can’t we make discrimination illegal and at the same time go to gay friendly places? In no way is this an either/or situation.
Comments are closed.