bruce springsteen cancelled ....

B.A._Baracus

That's a bit silly of Bruce Springsteen to cancel the gig.
Like he is against the law, thats ok. But he's just annoyed thousands of his fans. Sure they will get refunds but hey he'll still want people to buy tickets for the next gig he plays in North Carolina.

I don't fully believe it to be honest. Not saying he's not against the law. But truth be told there was most likely another reason why the gig got cancelled.

Minderbinder

FunLover18 wrote: »

But why would you feel uncomfortable?

How do mean practical? Pubs and restaurants won't have to make any changes, they won't even have to change the signs.

Segregated toilets are just tradition, probably driving from more conservative or prudish times (I'm not accusing you of either), I certainly don't think there's an practical reason, at least I can't think of any.

Oh I thought you were talking about introducing shared toilets to replace existing ones. That's why I called it impractical.

I wouldn't like a woman in the gents while I'm doing my business. Maybe I am conservative but I'd feel shy and uncomfortable. It might require a professional to tell me why but that's the way I am.

For me, if you're letting one man dressed as a woman into the ladies, then you have to leave all men in, should they wish to do so.

darkpagandeath

Everyone knows if you don't know the person they are a sex offender........ :rolleyes:

Annasopra

Minderbinder wrote: »

For me, if you're letting one man dressed as a woman into the ladies, then you have to leave all men in, should they wish to do so.

We are talking about trans women not men

Annasopra

Eugene Norman wrote: »

How do we work out the difference between a man dressed as a woman and a trans woman?

What exactly do you want to do? Install police at every public toilet to carry out mandatory genital checks?

Cathy.C

B.A._Baracus wrote: »

I don't fully believe it to be honest. Not saying he's not against the law. But truth be told there was most likely another reason why the gig got cancelled.

Sure he has released a statement confirming it.

As you, my fans, know I’m scheduled to play in Greensboro, North Carolina this Sunday. As we also know, North Carolina has just passed HB2, which the media are referring to as the “bathroom” law. HB2 — known officially as the Public Facilities Privacy and Security Act — dictates which bathrooms transgender people are permitted to use.

Just as important, the law also attacks the rights of LGBT citizens to sue when their human rights are violated in the workplace. No other group of North Carolinians faces such a burden. To my mind, it’s an attempt by people who cannot stand the progress our country has made in recognizing the human rights of all of our citizens to overturn that progress. Right now, there are many groups, businesses, and individuals in North Carolina working to oppose and overcome these negative developments.

Taking all of this into account, I feel that this is a time for me and the band to show solidarity for those freedom fighters. As a result, and with deepest apologies to our dedicated fans in Greensboro, we have canceled our show scheduled for Sunday, April 10th. Some things are more important than a rock show and this fight against prejudice and bigotry — which is happening as I write — is one of them. It is the strongest means I have for raising my voice in opposition to those who continue to push us backwards instead of forwards.

Band members also seem to support it also.

https://twitter.com/nilslofgren/status/718558398749368320

https://twitter.com/StevieVanZandt/status/718541654584639488

Discodog

Bruce said

"Some things are more important than a rock show and this fight against prejudice and bigotry — which is happening as I write — is one of them. It is the strongest means I have for raising my voice in opposition to those who continue to push us backwards instead of forwards."

I agree 100% . It's wonderful to see a musician take a stand instead of just thinking about the money. There was a time when musicians were at the forefront of protest.

the groutch

Discodog wrote: »

I agree 100% . It's wonderful to see a musician take a stand instead of just thinking about the money. There was a time when musicians were at the forefront of protest.

or selfishly putting his personal beliefs ahead of his fans.

Annasopra

the groutch wrote: »

or selfishly putting his personal beliefs ahead of his fans.

Or unselfishly using his clout to stand up and highlight human rights abuses

Minderbinder

Joeytheparrot wrote: »

We are talking about trans women not men

I understand that. But what if you think every person born with a penis is a man?

Academic

B.A._Baracus wrote: »

[...]

I don't fully believe it to be honest. Not saying he's not against the law. But truth be told there was most likely another reason why the gig got cancelled.

Why would you not believe it? He's been known for political activism for most of his career. This decision is entirely consistent with that.

Cheers,

Ac

Dirty Dingus McGee

Joeytheparrot wrote: »

Or unselfishly using his clout to stand up and highlight human rights abuses

He could probably do it in another way.

People have saved up probably planned for while to go and effectively he's said my personal beliefs are more important than your time.Which is perfectly fine if he wants to but it is a little disrespectful to his fans.

Perhaps a good idea would have been for him to take out an ad highlighting this issue or even talk about it at the concert.

I'd be fairly pissed off if I'd made plans to attend and the concert was cancelled 2 days before.

There could have been people who would have booked accommodation to stay the night, spent money on petrol etc and they are not going to get any refund.

The bill was passed a month ago.Why didn't he cancel it then?

Minderbinder

Joeytheparrot wrote: »

Or unselfishly using his clout to stand up and highlight human rights abuses

It's laughable and insulting to call this a human rights issue. If he cancels a concert because of this, he'll never play again, anywhere.

MacauDragon

Minderbinder wrote: »

It's laughable and insulting to call this a human rights issue. If he cancels a concert because of this, he'll never play again, anywhere.

Maybe its just a very smart tactic to get a few days off.
Could it be replicated ??


Anyway. Some women are uncomfortable with the idea of cocks (or ex owners of said cocks) floating around the ladies room. Some transgenders are uncomfortable with being in the men's room.
Its not always practical to do away with urinals.

The best solution I can see is to make the handicapped toilet into a designated trans toilet just as they have been made into baby change rooms.

Weiners left, non-weiners right, wheelchair users, baby changers and transexuals to the designated room.

Calhoun

Minderbinder wrote: »

It's laughable and insulting to call this a human rights issue. If he cancels a concert because of this, he'll never play again, anywhere.

It's laughable and insulting not to call this a human rights issue. Imagine a transgender male or female who are post op and for all intensive purposes have the same going on downstairs, why should it matter if they use the toilet of the sex they identify as.

Now I don't know about women but us guys dont have penis inspection while at the stall, we normally just get on with it and try avoid each other (see video on male toilet ethicite). As women it's even easier as they don't go I'm a urinal you have seperate cubicles.

What's next after this ? Do we need little yellow stars to identify transgender people so we can ensure they follow the law?

PancakeJOE

Big stand there Bruce. Looking for publicity at your fans expense....nice work!!! You're awesome!!! He could of played and donated the proceeds to awareness groups etc,Pure laziness and a publicity stunt IMO.

Academic

Minderbinder wrote: »

It's laughable and insulting to call this a human rights issue. If he cancels a concert because of this, he'll never play again, anywhere.

Now you’re just being silly. His concerts sell out and will continue to do so.

KERSPLAT!

Minderbinder wrote: »

It's laughable and insulting to call this a human rights issue. If he cancels a concert because of this, he'll never play again, anywhere.

I bet everything I own that this will not happen. Ludicrous.

Academic

Minderbinder wrote: »

It's laughable and insulting to call this a human rights issue. [...]

So you think it’s OK to fire someone from a job just because of their sexual orientation? You think it’s OK for a business to refuse to serve them for that reason? That’s what the legislation authorizes, you know. How are these not 'human rights' issues?


You’re also talking like Springstein’s alone in this. He’s not. A number of corporations are boycotting the state as well and that number is growing. And these boycotts work: they’ve been effective in changing similarly regressive legislation in other U.S. states in recent year.

Dirty Dingus McGee

Academic wrote: »

Now you’re just being silly. His concerts sell out and will continue to do so.

I think what he is saying is that if this issue is big enough to cancel a concert over then he can't really play in too many countries as peoples rights are being abused on a daily basis all over the world.

Academic

Dirty Dingus McGee wrote: »

I think what he is saying is that if this issue is big enough to cancel a concert over then he can't really play in too many countries as peoples rights are being abused on a daily basis all over the world.

Not an exact analogy: this is taking place in the U.S. and he's a U.S. citizen and voter.

Cheers,

Ac

Dirty Dingus McGee

Academic wrote: »

So you think it’s OK to fire someone from a job just because of their sexual orientation? You think it’s OK for a business to refuse to serve them for that reason? That’s what the legislation authorizes, you know. How are these not 'human rights' issues?


You’re also talking like Springstein’s alone in this. He’s not. A number of corporations are boycotting the state as well and that number is growing. And these boycotts work: they’ve been effective in changing similarly regressive legislation in other U.S. states in recent year.

Are these firms sacking already existing staff because of the issue and deliberately interfering with peoples already existing plans.I would hope they weren't because that would be very mean spirited.

Springsteen could have used this to say that this was the last time he would play in North Carolina and said he would have cancelled but didn't want his fans to lose out.

It would have had a similar impact and nowhere near the annoyance for people.He could have donated the proceeds from the concert to a campaign against the legislation.

The legislation passed last month so he had ample time to take this stand and cause less disruption for his fans.The law hasn't just sprung up overnight it passed a few weeks ago and was on the books I;m sure for a good while before that.

RDM_83 again

Bit of a dick move by him considering this has been on the cards for a while, why not cancel it when it passed and save his fans paying out for hotels time off etc

About the law itself, I think a lot of these recent types of laws are to some extent driven by the law suit culture, for example if a person said a trans person by their presence or actions was making them uncomfortable, the calmer response of asking if the trans person could use unisex or other private bathroom facilities isn't really an option as its legally discriminating against them.
Take the gay cake case in Northern Ireland, when anti discrimination law is misused to force people to act against their own personal/religious/ethical beliefs in a manner thats unnecessary, it doesn't improve the lives of those who's action is taken in their name it simply convinces more moderate people that exceptions from equality legislation might actually be a good idea.

ps if thinking the gay cake verdict was flawed is reactionary I will be in good company with notorious homophobes like Peter Tatchell

Academic

Dirty Dingus McGee wrote: »

[...]

The legislation passed last month so he had ample time to take this stand and cause less disruption for his fans.The law hasn't just sprung up overnight it passed a few weeks ago and was on the books I;m sure for a good while before that.

So all objections to offensive legislation must be raised, what, within 24 hours of passage?



48, perhaps?

Academic

Paypal and others are joining the boycott.

Cheers

Ac

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/04/06/us/gay-rights-mississippi-north-carolina.html

Dirty Dingus McGee

Academic wrote: »

So all objections to offensive legislation must be raised, what, within 24 hours of passage?



48, perhaps?

No.

What I said was is that his fans are losing out because he waited a few weeks to make a decision.It must be quite annoying to have something cancelled at virtually the last minute, a cancellation with 3 weeks notice is nowhere near as annoying and nowhere near as disrespectful to his fans.

My name is URL

Academic wrote: »

Paypal and others are joining the boycott.

Cheers

Ac

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/04/06/us/gay-rights-mississippi-north-carolina.html

It's one thing individuals making a stand and boycotting states and towns.

I know it happens already through lobbying etc, but I don't quite like the idea of large corporations dictating about what laws should be introduced, and handing out ultimatums like that.

Academic

My name is URL wrote: »

It's one thing individuals making a stand and boycotting states and towns.

I know it happens already through lobbying etc, but I don't quite like the idea of large corporations dictating about what laws should be introduced, and handing out ultimatums like that.

No one's "dictating" anything. They're simply saying "if you do this we take our business elsewhere."

I'm guessing you opposed the apartheid boycott of South Africa?

Fair enough.

rsh118

My name is URL wrote: »

It's one thing individuals making a stand and boycotting states and towns.

I know it happens already through lobbying etc, but I don't quite like the idea of large corporations dictating about what laws should be introduced, and handing out ultimatums like that.

Big Business will always lobby, at least these ones are lobbying for something which makes some of society's most marginalised groups feel more included.

Water John

Some one saying Bruce looking for the publicity for himself.
That's really laughable.

Made his point and maximised his impact in doing so.

The Boss doesn't need to prove anything. Been there, done that, many times over. Gives a 3 hour gig when most find themselves stretched if they do 90 mins.