Does a ban on stag parties qualify as sexual discrimination?

Sleepy

I was just emailed a link to this hotel where I'll be attending a conference in November and noticed the following text at the bottom of the page:

While Breaffy House Hotel welcomes groups, including Hen parties we do not take reservations for Stag parties, reservations for any party of this nature will be cancelled either at the point of reservation or indeed upon arrival at the hotel.

Surely that's illegal under our equality legislation/case law? Anyone able to confirm/dismiss this?

grumpytrousers

erm - the group being 'disadvantaged' isn't, i'd think, a 'group of men' (which would be discrimination) but rather a 'group of men who will, more likely than not get rat-arsed in town and come in making loads of noise at 4 in the morning' and thus they probably have the right to let in who they want.

Ah, but they let hen parties in. Discrimination there you'll find.

johnnyskeleton

If a reasonable person would think that there is a substantial risk of criminal or disorderly conduct or behaviour or damage to property at or in the vicinity of the place in which the goods or services are sought or the premises or accommodation are located.(source)

Time Magazine

The Breaffy House is in Castlebar, if I'm not mistaken. In Castlebar a pub was over-run by travellers. Can they reasonably fear a substantial risk of disorderly conduct if it's a traveller event? Obviously a loaded question, because they can't.

Sleepy

I'm thinking it's certainly discrimination. From my experience as a night porter, I'd rather have 3 stags staying in a hotel I was working in than a hen party. Now, I know that's a sexist remark, but I'm not operating a business based on that remark.

Rhonda9000

This one reminds me of the story about the crowd of semi intoxicated patrons waiting in the cold and rain to enter the grotty nightclub only to be left there [for a long time]. One of a group the doorman does not like is duly refused after making way to the front of the queue. Another in the group spouts "like you cawnt do that, Im a law student". God help us.

Technically "illegal" things are happening at all times - driving 31 in a 30 etc etc etc. Will a court really have much time for a stag group presenting a case about being 'discriminated' against by a hotel admission policy? Should it be expected to waste it's time deciding the matter? Should equality legislation - designed to protect genuinely vulnerable persons treated less favourably by default - give a fanny adams about the stag men's hotel accomodation difficulty?

Sleepy

Rhonda9000, it was my understanding that equality legislation was put in place to ensure equal treatment of all citizens.

My query wasn't about whether or not a court should have to hear a case of this nature, it's about whether or not this is actually an illegal practice. I'm not a lawyer and my experience of equality law wouldn't even rival a first year law students so I thought I'd ask some people who might have that knowledge.

Forgive me if my view of equality offends your feminist sensibilities.

seamus

Rhonda9000 wrote:

This one reminds me of the story about the crowd of semi intoxicated patrons waiting in the cold and rain to enter the grotty nightclub only to be left there [for a long time]. One of a group the doorman does not like is duly refused after making way to the front of the queue. Another in the group spouts "like you cawnt do that, Im a law student". God help us.

Indeed, I know of people who've started spouting off after a Garda asked them to move on from outside a chipper, "You can't tell us to move on, I'm a law student, I know my rights". (Ended up in a cell for the night for that one).

Will a court really have much time for a stag group presenting a case about being 'discriminated' against by a hotel admission policy? Should it be expected to waste it's time deciding the matter? Should equality legislation - designed to protect genuinely vulnerable persons treated less favourably by default - give a fanny adams about the stag men's hotel accomodation difficulty?

I'm theoretically in agreement here. There's a bit too much of a tendancy to run to the courts screaming injustice in this country, when all we really need to do is vote with our feet. I'm not saying that it's OK for people to break the law, provided that nobody is that upset about it, but minor stuff like this, doesn't warrant any action IMO.

It's also a thorny one. As a male, you are not being prevented from making a booking. So on that count it can be argued that no sexual discrimination is taking place. You're also not being prevented from making individual bookings for your stag party - only from making one large "stag party" booking. While there's an implied meaning that this means they won't take large booking for men, there's an argument that stag parties don't necessarily only contain men - sometimes female friends will go to them. So in that context, it's not really a ban on parties of a certain sex, only parties of a certain type - they could just as validly say, "We do not take bookings for 30th birthdays".

Sleepy

[QUOTE=seamusthey could just as validly say, "We do not take bookings for 30th birthdays".[/QUOTE]
Could they? If they took bookings for 29th birthday parties would this not fall foul of ageism laws?

Like I said, I'm not even looking at organising a stag, this just struck me as another sign that society is starting to discriminate against the male sex. Maybe it's just a backlash resulting from feminist liberation (after all, most societal changes tend to overcopensate before settling) but imho discrimination is unacceptable in any fashion and over-compensating for past mistakes does nothing to promote equality.

Rhonda9000

Sleepy wrote:

Rhonda9000, it was my understanding that equality legislation was put in place to ensure equal treatment of all citizens.

My query wasn't about whether or not a court should have to hear a case of this nature, it's about whether or not this is actually an illegal practice. I'm not a lawyer and my experience of equality law wouldn't even rival a first year law students so I thought I'd ask some people who might have that knowledge.

Forgive me if my view of equality offends your feminist sensibilities.

Sleepy - I wasn't attacking your point just pushing out my thoughts on the matter. Your view isn't offensive. Equality is a very broad concept and while it would be smashing to reach the 100% equality ideal, it's not feasible. I think the situation you outline re. male stag parties being rejected is analogous to e.g. male car insurance premia being higher etc. etc. It is the commercial world's method of discriminating [if you like] against clientelle with a higher risk profile. In my mind, it is far detached from the legal notion of equal treatment for men / women, gay / straight, settled / traveller uniformly in more substantive contexts such as employment. It is in this regard that I think discretionary hotel admission policies do not fall foul of the Equal Status Act etc.

And ... while I'm far from a feminist, I'd like to put it out there that heterosexual males are traditionally (and still remain IMHO) the least discriminated against group in society so I won't be taking out my violin for male stags any time soon.

Rhonda9000

seamus wrote:

Indeed, I know of people who've started spouting off after a Garda asked them to move on from outside a chipper, "You can't tell us to move on, I'm a law student, I know my rights". (Ended up in a cell for the night for that one).
I'm theoretically in agreement here. There's a bit too much of a tendancy to run to the courts screaming injustice in this country, when all we really need to do is vote with our feet. I'm not saying that it's OK for people to break the law, provided that nobody is that upset about it, but minor stuff like this, doesn't warrant any action IMO.

It's also a thorny one. As a male, you are not being prevented from making a booking. So on that count it can be argued that no sexual discrimination is taking place. You're also not being prevented from making individual bookings for your stag party - only from making one large "stag party" booking. While there's an implied meaning that this means they won't take large booking for men, there's an argument that stag parties don't necessarily only contain men - sometimes female friends will go to them. So in that context, it's not really a ban on parties of a certain sex, only parties of a certain type - they could just as validly say, "We do not take bookings for 30th birthdays".

30 year old birthday celebrants are notoriously badly behaved, ban them I say

Gobán Saor

Ibid wrote:

The Breaffy House is in Castlebar, if I'm not mistaken. In Castlebar a pub was over-run by travellers. Can they reasonably fear a substantial risk of disorderly conduct if it's a traveller event? Obviously a loaded question, because they can't.

Well....... Unlikely that a court would stand over a reasonable fear of substantial risk of disorderly conduct simply because its a traveller event. (Even though, statistically, there might well be a greater historical incidence of disorderly conduct at such traveller events. Or there might not be - don't know of any rigorous scientific study - anecdotal or "dogs in the street" evidence doesn't count) However, if a hotel or service provider was aware of specific incidents of previous disorderly conduct by identified individuals then events organised by those individuals (or their known associates) could indeed give rise to a very reasonable fear and would justify a refusal of service.

Cantab.

Breaffy House Hotel - grand spot, incredibly cheap (it's gettin' cut-throat competitive out weshht these days!)

I stayed in Breaffy about 3 months ago - only thing about it was: there were loads of loud and messy kids with bad table manners at breakfast.

I don't see why the hotel should facilitate rowdy drunks in what is quite obviously a hotel targeted towards families and children.

There are hundreds of other hotels in the West of Ireland. I don't think stags would be impressed by the availablity of loose women at Breaffy House. A hotel more centrally located might be more suitable?

Sleepy

Gob&#225 wrote: »

Well....... Unlikely that a court would stand over a reasonable fear of substantial risk of disorderly conduct simply because its a traveller event. (Even though, statistically, there might well be a greater historical incidence of disorderly conduct at such traveller events. Or there might not be - don't know of any rigorous scientific study - anecdotal or "dogs in the street" evidence doesn't count) However, if a hotel or service provider was aware of specific incidents of previous disorderly conduct by identified individuals then events organised by those individuals (or their known associates) could indeed give rise to a very reasonable fear and would justify a refusal of service.

If that's the case, surely they couldn't stand over discrimination based on "a reasonable fear of substantial risk of disorderly conduct simply because its a stag event"?

Rhonda9000 wrote:

Sleepy - I wasn't attacking your point just pushing out my thoughts on the matter. Your view isn't offensive. Equality is a very broad concept and while it would be smashing to reach the 100% equality ideal, it's not feasible.

Maybe not from a sociological POV, as evidenced by the fact many women's careers are still cut short by employers fears of them taking maternity leave etc. From a legal POV, however, that practice is illegal and those employers that still engage in behaviour like this go to great lengths to hide it. I guess I'm just surprised at the blatancy of this discrimination.

I think the situation you outline re. male stag parties being rejected is analogous to e.g. male car insurance premia being higher etc. etc. It is the commercial world's method of discriminating [if you like] against clientelle with a higher risk profile.

In my mind, it is far detached from the legal notion of equal treatment for men / women, gay / straight, settled / traveller uniformly in more substantive contexts such as employment. It is in this regard that I think discretionary hotel admission policies do not fall foul of the Equal Status Act etc.

And ... while I'm far from a feminist, I'd like to put it out there that heterosexual males are traditionally (and still remain IMHO) the least discriminated against group in society so I won't be taking out my violin for male stags any time soon.

I have to say I disagree on your last point with respect to Irish society. On a global scale, I'd agree but not within Ireland.

Also, while it's purely an annecdotal perspective, from my time in the hotel industry, most night porters (i.e. the one's who face the consequences of stags and hens) would take 2 stag parties over a single hen party. Men seem to be much better behaved on these events than women.

Apologies if I came across as very defensive in my last post, a lot gets lost in translation when there's no intonation or body language!

Sleepy

Cantab. wrote:

Breaffy House Hotel - grand spot, incredibly cheap (it's gettin' cut-throat competitive out weshht these days!)

I stayed in Breaffy about 3 months ago - only thing about it was: there were loads of loud and messy kids with bad table manners at breakfast.

I don't see why the hotel should facilitate rowdy drunks in what is quite obviously a hotel targeted towards families and children.

There are hundreds of other hotels in the West of Ireland. I don't think stags would be impressed by the availablity of loose women at Breaffy House. A hotel more centrally located might be more suitable?

They might want to come down the weekend I'm going. I think the group of us will be at least 90% female! lol

johnnyskeleton

Cantab. wrote:

I don't see why the hotel should facilitate rowdy drunks in what is quite obviously a hotel targeted towards families and children.

Exactly, they refuse to provide the service to groups which they reasonably believe could engage in disorderly conduct.

The fact that they don't refuse another group which could possibly engage in disorderly conduct, or which they don't reasonably believe could engage in similar conduct is neither here nor there. It would, in my view, only be illegal discrimination if the proprietors believed that both stag and hen parties were (or were not) likely to cause a ruckus, but they decided to prohibit only stag (or hen) parties because they didn't like men (or women).

Rhonda9000 wrote:

I'd like to put it out there that heterosexual males are traditionally (and still remain IMHO) the least discriminated against group in society

On the contrary, they are so discriminated against by society that the only place they can truly be themselves is Portmarnock Golf Club, and that last bastion is forever under seige.

griffdaddy

seamus wrote:

Indeed, I know of people who've started spouting off after a Garda asked them to move on from outside a chipper, "You can't tell us to move on, I'm a law student, I know my rights". (Ended up in a cell for the night for that one).

My personal variation is "I'm a Philosophy Student, How do you know I'm actually outside the chipper?" net result is the same though:o

Tom Young

Anyone stupid enough to use that line with a garda

"I am a law student, I know my rights"

is cleary deserving of a night away. If they'd know the 1994 Public Order Offences Act surely they'd realise the margins afforded to the Gardai and indeed the missing mens rea where/when intoxicated.

ircoha

Does a ban on stag parties qualify as sexual discrimination?

Where/when/how can "sexual discrimo" arise at a stag party?:)

GerardKeating

Sleepy wrote:

Surely that's illegal under our equality legislation/case law? Anyone able to confirm/dismiss this?

Is the concept of a stag party itself not a form of sexual discrimination???