Gay couple humiliated after being asked to leave Dublin restaurant

Billy86 · 30-10-2015 10:54PM

alcaline wrote: »

Your post is a Perfect example of PC thinking, most straight people have no problem with gay people getting married and living a happy life, but fact is we don't want to know Fukc all about their lifestyle, and find the sight of two men kissing repulsive.
So to make it simple for PC dullards, straight folk wish you all the best in your gay marriage but we don't want to know about it.
Whats so hard about that to understand?

So now 'PC' = 'not making sh!t up that the OP explicitly stated did not happen'?

I understand why you're frustrated though, it has been a pretty rough year for your type.

Ghost Buster · 30-10-2015 10:56PM

One eyed Jack wrote: »

Tax I think what you're willing to accept as a reasonable resolution, and what I am willing to accept as a reasonable resolution, are two very different things. You may be of the impression that all you deserve is to be moved to another table. I would be happy for the couple to be made aware that their behaviour is making me uncomfortable. If they continued, then I would complain again, and I would complain again after that, until they either understood and quit their public displays, or they decided to leave of their own accord.

And if i complained about you being a moany hole in a restaurant and disturbing my meal and that of the people you are wrongly offended by what sort of reaction could i expect from the management?

30-10-2015 10:56PM

One eyed Jack wrote: »

Tax I think what you're willing to accept as a reasonable resolution, and what I am willing to accept as a reasonable resolution, are two very different things.

Yes of course they are. Because I see no basis for expectation of ANY resolution that involves disturbing someone - let alone banishing them - when they are doing nothing at all wrong.

Your only response to this is to postulate the existence of some restaurant which maintains standards where hand holding IS wrong - yet when asked for a short list you have not even come back with ONE known example.

Yet you not only claim such establishments exist - but that people specifically go there to pay for those standards. So your claims clearly indicate not only that such places exist - but that people know about them. But again I repeat you have not even managed to name ONE.

One eyed Jack wrote: »

You may be of the impression that all you deserve is to be moved to another table. I would be happy for the couple to be made aware that their behaviour is making me uncomfortable.

Then get up and let them know yourself if you wish to communicate with them. See where it gets you. The role and job description of waiters is not one of message delivery between customers.

There is no basis for expecting the staff to do it for you given they are doing nothing wrong. As to do so would mean you are seeking to ACTUALLY disturb someone in their meal off the basis of you DECIDING you are disturbed by someone doing nothing wrong.

One eyed Jack wrote: »

If they continued, then I would complain again, and I would complain again after that, until they either understood and quit their public displays, or they decided to leave of their own accord.

There is no reason to expect them to quit doing anything of the sort as once again THEY ARE DOING NOTHING WRONG - and you harassing them like some old crank continuously puts you in the wrong not them - even if you managed to find any staff who would pass your message along like some kind of lacky even once - let alone multiple times.

Billy86 · 30-10-2015 10:59PM

alcaline wrote: »

Part of the PC liberal hate mob?
They rage against straight white men, hate their guts.

Oh, the ironing is delicious!

Billy86 · 30-10-2015 11:03PM

QuinDixie wrote: »

totally made up story, the gay mafia are not getting the backlash they expected from the gay marriage referendum, so they have to make up stories of their rights under attack.

to set the moral agenda and to get this agenda into the educational system, it helps to have negative stories like this.

Expect more stories of this ilk, gay adoption has to be won dont you know.

Well if it doesn't work you better be careful or they might adopt more extreme measures!

One eyed Jack · 30-10-2015 11:07PM

Ghost Buster wrote: »

And if i complained about you being a moany hole in a restaurant and disturbing my meal and that of the people you are wrongly offended by what sort of reaction could i expect from the management?

I don't know, and I care even less for what sort of reaction you expect from management.

Ghost Buster · 30-10-2015 11:13PM

One eyed Jack wrote: »

I don't know, and I care even less for what sort of reaction you expect from management.

Shame that seeing as you would be the one being totally out of order and disruptive and not the couple holding hands.
Odd that.

Arytonblue · 30-10-2015 11:18PM

QuinDixie wrote: »

totally made up story, the gay mafia are not getting the backlash they expected from the gay marriage referendum, so they have to make up stories of their rights under attack.

to set the moral agenda and to get this agenda into the educational system, it helps to have negative stories like this.

Expect more stories of this ilk, gay adoption has to be won dont you know.

Those pesky gays got our precious marriage, but that wasn't enough, now they're coming after our pure, innocent children next, brainwashing the next generation with their twaddle about 'equality' and 'tolerance', we're doomed I say, DOOMED!

One eyed Jack · 30-10-2015 11:19PM

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Your only response to this is to postulate the existence of some restaurant which maintains standards where hand holding IS wrong - yet when asked for a short list you have not even come back with ONE known example.

Yet you not only claim such establishments exist - but that people specifically go there to pay for those standards. So your claims clearly indicate not only that such places exist - but that people know about them. But again I repeat you have not even managed to name ONE.

I never claimed such establishments exist. I've said that according to that letter author, they do seem to exist. As soon as the letter author is able to name the restaurant, we shall all become aware of it.

Then get up and let them know yourself if you wish to communicate with them. See where it gets you. The role and job description of waiters is not one of message delivery between customers.

There is no basis for expecting the staff to do it for you given they are doing nothing wrong. As to do so would mean you are seeking to ACTUALLY disturb someone in their meal off the basis of you DECIDING you are disturbed by someone doing nothing wrong.

I will not get up from my table to approach complete strangers! How crass is that? I will signal the attention of my waiter and explain to him why I am not enjoying my dining experience, and I would expect that he would then endeavour to resolve the issue so that I may resume my enjoyment of my dining experience. That's what I was expected to do as a waiter, even through it was never on the job description. It appears we also have different expectations of a service provided by our waiters.

There is no reason to expect them to quit doing anything of the sort as once again THEY ARE DOING NOTHING WRONG - and you harassing them like some old crank continuously puts you in the wrong not them - even if you managed to find any staff who would pass your message along like some kind of lacky even once - let alone multiple times.

Clearly our dining experiences and our experiences of the services industry and customer service vary so greatly, that it just isn't worth continuing this discussion when our perspectives are so polar opposites.

Ghost Buster · 30-10-2015 11:24PM

One eyed Jack wrote: »

I never claimed such establishments exist. I've said that according to that letter author, they do seem to exist. As soon as the letter author is able to name the restaurant, we shall all become aware of it.

I will not get up from my table to approach complete strangers! How crass is that? I will signal the attention of my waiter and explain to him why I am not enjoying my dining experience, and I would expect that he would then endeavour to resolve the issue so that I may resume my enjoyment of my dining experience. That's what I was expected to do as a waiter, even through it was never on the job description. It appears we also have different expectations of a service provided by our waiters.

Clearly our dining experiences and our experiences of the services industry and customer service vary so greatly, that it just isn't worth continuing this discussion when our perspectives are so polar opposites.

As a waiter you are expected to look after your customers. If some crank is insisting that you take a course of action against other diners doing what is perfectly normal in a restaurant you deal with the diner being an idiot.
You must have been a ****e waiter.

The Randy Riverbeast · 30-10-2015 11:33PM

QuinDixie wrote: »

totally made up story, the gay mafia are not getting the backlash they expected from the gay marriage referendum, so they have to make up stories of their rights under attack.

to set the moral agenda and to get this agenda into the educational system, it helps to have negative stories like this.

Expect more stories of this ilk, gay adoption has to be won dont you know.

Christ, I thought people weren't serious with the whole "vote no so they cant adopt" crap. People really did think that the legislation for gay couples being allowed to adopt really didn't exist?

I thought they just didnt like gay people, it turns out they just had no understanding of what was going on.

Kiwi in IE · 30-10-2015 11:36PM

Arytonblue wrote: »

Those pesky gays got our precious marriage, but that wasn't enough, now they're coming after our pure, innocent children next, brainwashing the next generation with their twaddle about 'equality' and 'tolerance', we're doomed I say, DOOMED!

Marriage wasn't enough, now they want to hold hands in restaurants! This must be the slippery slope Iona & co were so fond of talking about before the referendum.

30-10-2015 11:39PM

One eyed Jack wrote: »

I never claimed such establishments exist.

Yes you did - lets not change history now. You specifically referred to establishments not only upholding such standards - but where people specifically go to pay for them. I can quote posts and text if asked. And I was not the only user who asked you to name them - so I am not the only user who noticed you do it.

One eyed Jack wrote: »

I will not get up from my table to approach complete strangers! How crass is that?

No more or less crass than expecting waiters to delivery messages between tables for you. And no more or less crass than complaining about people who are doing NOTHING wrong simply because you have issues.

One eyed Jack wrote: »

I would expect that he would then endeavour to resolve the issue

So would I. I would expect him to offer you the option to leave quickly - or to move you to a table where your own issues bother you less. If you expect any more of him than this - then your expectations are ill founded and unwarranted.

Nor are you the only customer a waiter has to look after. He can protect other customers from cranks - by not disturbing them with baseless and unwarranted complaints from other customers - and instead deal with the crank and protect THEIR interests - by showing the crank to another table - or the door.

One eyed Jack wrote: »

It appears we also have different expectations of a service provided by our waiters.

Nope - just different expectations on how they should be expected to fulfill it. Yours are unwarranted. Mine are not.

One eyed Jack wrote: »

it just isn't worth continuing this discussion when our perspectives are so polar opposites.

Ah your old "I am leaving the discussion" move. You are welcome to leave any time you want - or to pretend to leave and then return as you often do and are highly likely to do RIGHT now infact - I too will leave it when I am ready to leave it - not when you are ready for me to leave it.

One eyed Jack · 30-10-2015 11:41PM

Ghost Buster wrote: »

As a waiter you are expected to look after your customers. If some crank is insisting that you take a course of action against other diners doing what is perfectly normal in a restaurant you deal with the diner being an idiot.

You must have been a ****e waiter.

And I excelled at looking after my customers, and was rewarded handsomely for that, so your judgement that I must have been a shìte waiter, certainly doesn't correlate with my customers opinions at the time, nor the opinions of my employers at the time.

I dealt with plenty of cranks and idiots btw, and kept them happy too, because I always carried myself in a professional and dignified manner, as opposed to throwing a hissy fit or arguing when I was told to do something in spite of the fact that I may not have wanted to, like dealing with **** who had no consideration for other people dining in the restaurant.

30-10-2015 11:49PM

One eyed Jack wrote: »

And I excelled at looking after my customers, and was rewarded handsomely for that, so your judgement that I must have been a shìte waiter, certainly doesn't correlate with my customers opinions at the time, nor the opinions of my employers at the time.

All of which is as verifiable as the OP story of course.

One eyed Jack wrote: »

I was told to do something in spite of the fact that I may not have wanted to

Customers do not get to TELL waiters what to do. Nor has a single person but you suggested that any waiter is throwing a "hissy fit" here. Pocket the hyperbole. They get to REQUEST the waiter to do something not tell them. And the waiter should deal with such requests in the light of protecting the interests of all customers - not just the crank moaning at them.

And if a crank is moaning about people who are doing nothing wrong - then the best course of action for a waiter is to leave the innocent people alone - and find some _other way_ to either appease the crank - or rid the establishment of them.

Moving the crank to a table where their own issues are no longer a concern - ensures everyone is happy. Disturbing the innocent for no reason might make the crank happy - but it ruins someone elses evening or moment or meal. Anyone pretending to have been a good waiter will know choosing making everyone happy - is a better outcome than choosing to switch one unhappy customer for another.

One eyed Jack wrote: »

dealing with **** who had no consideration for other people dining in the restaurant.

Which is not what the thread is about - because merely holding hands in public warrants no consideration for other people. It is a perfectly acceptable activity and no one should be expected to second guess the feelings of others while engaging in it.

Someone who has these issues - like yourself - should be considerate of others by not inflicting those issues on others - and not going into situations where you are highly likely to encounter people who will set them off.

One eyed Jack · 31-10-2015 12:07AM

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Yes you did - lets not change history now. You specifically referred to establishments not only upholding such standards - but where people specifically go to pay for them. I can quote posts and text if asked. And I was not the only user who asked you to name them - so I am not the only user who noticed you do it.

You could indeed quote posts all you want, but until you can quote a post where I stated that these places actually exist, well, all you can do is quote mining to stitch together a narrative that suits your argument.

No more or less crass than expecting waiters to delivery messages between tables for you. And no more or less crass than complaining about people who are doing NOTHING wrong simply because you have issues.

I never said anything about expecting waiters to deliver messages between tables. I simply make a complaint to my waiter that I am not enjoying my dining experience. I expect my waiter or waitress to do their job.

So would I. I would expect him to offer you the option to leave quickly - or to move you to a table where your own issues bother you less. If you expect any more of him than this - then your expectations are ill founded and unwarranted.

My expectations are based upon my experience. What yours are based on, I have no idea.

Nor are you the only customer a waiter has to look after. He can protect other customers from cranks - by not disturbing them with baseless and unwarranted complaints from other customers - and instead deal with the crank and protect THEIR interests - by showing the crank to another table - or the door.

That would be you protecting your interests if you were in the position of the waiter in that scenario. I would be acting in the interests of my employer, and attempt to reach a resolution between all parties. One thing I can always say is that my employers always had my back when there was an inconsiderate wanker like the one that wrote that letter.

Nope - just different expectations on how they should be expected to fulfill it. Yours are unwarranted. Mine are not.

Again, my expectations are based upon my experiences. What yours are based on, i have no idea.

Ah your old "I am leaving the discussion" move. You are welcome to leave any time you want - or to pretend to leave and then return as you often do and are highly likely to do RIGHT now infact - I too will leave it when I am ready to leave it - not when you are ready for me to leave it.

I never said I was leaving the discussion? I questioned whether it was worth continuing when we are at polar opposites. I did ask you earlier whether you considered the discussion worth pursuing. You avoided the question, but i took your reply to mean that you figured it was worth pursuing for now. Do you see a resolution in sight that I don't?

QuinDixie · 31-10-2015 12:13AM

One eyed Jack wrote: »

I hate to be the one to break it to you but... well, unless you actually have been taking Kiwi's advice, people who are gay were always eligible to apply for an adoption.

and i hate to break to you, gay men who want to adopt babies have 2 choices
1. adopt abroad
2. surrogacy.
and no amount of smooching in public is going to change that.

But of course Gay men must have the right to have children even if the rights of the poor in the third world are trampled.

One eyed Jack · 31-10-2015 12:19AM

QuinDixie wrote: »

and i hate to break to you, gay men who want to adopt babies have 2 choices
1. adopt abroad
2. surrogacy.
and no amount of smooching in public is going to change that.

But of course Gay men must have the right to have children even if the rights of the poor in the third world are trampled.

Please, go and check what you're putting out there before you put it out there. I know you're unlikely to be embarrassed by the fact that you're wrong, but you are.

Before the marriage equality referendum, same sex couples were not eligible to apply jointly to adopt. They were always eligible to adopt as individuals, regardless of their sexual orientation. Only married couples were allowed adopt jointly, and now that the marriage equality bill has become an Act, well, do you need me to draw you a diagram on the back of a napkin?

ixoy · 31-10-2015 12:23AM

QuinDixie wrote: »

no amount of smooching in public is going to change that.

But of course Gay men must have the right to have children.. .

So now gay men are kissing in public to adopt children? I assume you're saying that because otherwise the two things are unrelated.

Arytonblue · 31-10-2015 12:26AM

QuinDixie wrote: »

and i hate to break to you, gay men who want to adopt babies have 2 choices
1. adopt abroad
2. surrogacy.
and no amount of smooching in public is going to change that.

Children and Family Relationships Act was passed earlier this year in conjunction with the passage of the Marriage Ref, allowing married gay couples to adopt, even before that there was no restriction on gay adults legally applying for adoption individually, and there are already many children in Ireland with same-sex parents (shock horror).

QuinDixie wrote: »

But of course Gay men must have the right to have children even if the rights of the poor in the third world are trampled.

LOL

Billy86 · 31-10-2015 12:39AM

Lads like I said, don't be too hard on QuinDixie... it really has been a rough year for him and his type. They must have never thought it would ever be something that they would have to face. Poor souls.

QuinDixie · 31-10-2015 02:21AM

One eyed Jack wrote: »

Please, go and check what you're putting out there before you put it out there. I know you're unlikely to be embarrassed by the fact that you're wrong, but you are.

Before the marriage equality referendum, same sex couples were not eligible to apply jointly to adopt. They were always eligible to adopt as individuals, regardless of their sexual orientation. Only married couples were allowed adopt jointly, and now that the marriage equality bill has become an Act, well, do you need me to draw you a diagram on the back of a napkin?

where do gay men buy your children from these days?
cambodia, thailand, vietnam, nepal or has the market and fashion changed.

Guffy · 31-10-2015 02:33AM

QuinDixie wrote: »

where do gay men buy your children from these days?
cambodia, thailand, vietnam, nepal or has the market and fashion changed.

Haven't read the whole thread... said I'd flick to the end to see if there was any truth to the article before i bothered....

But wow... just wow

Billy86 · 31-10-2015 02:39AM

QuinDixie wrote: »

where do gay men buy your children from these days?
cambodia, thailand, vietnam, nepal or has the market and fashion changed.

Jack's not gay, I'm not even sure he voted yes in the referendum.

And I think you'll find the answer is most typically that they adopt kids from Ireland. Not sure where you get the idea of buying children from, but then again you don't seem too clued in on the process in general so it's no surprise.

Richard tea · 31-10-2015 02:50AM

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

Name and shame.

It was Adam & Steve

Billy86 · 31-10-2015 02:55AM

gufc21 wrote: »

Haven't read the whole thread... said I'd flick to the end to see if there was any truth to the article before i bothered....

But wow... just wow

It's been an awful year for homophobes, to be fair. A dying breed, in a proven minority, and becoming social pariahs at an accelerating rate. They must have felt pretty 'safe' in a more typically traditional country like Ireland in this sense, but a few months ago that bubble burst entirely, and by such a wide margin that they now know how they'll be viewed by future generations. Which explains how much more vocally bitter they have become in the last 6 months or so.

To be honest... it's faaaaaaaabulous! :pac:

Peregrine · 31-10-2015 10:49AM

QuinDixie banned and banned from posting in this thread. Move along.

arybvtcw0eolkf · 31-10-2015 12:03PM

I took the story with a pinch of salt, why?.. Because I have some experience with this sort of stuff through years working in bars & clubs.

Some couples, both straight & gay do go overboard with PDA's ~ neither offend me personally but some people are offended and often point this out to the staff.

Ordinarily I'd make a joke of it to the couple along the lines of 'hey get a room you two.. and try be light hearted about it.

Without exception, and I won't be contradicted on this, the straight couple will stop and get a giggle from it. And the gay couple will kick up an absolute stink and deny down to the ground what I've seen with my own eyes.

The bar I work at now is an alternative scene and you'd have to really, REALLY push the boundaries to offend anyone so these things are no longer an issue for me.

But in other bars and clubs I've had my fingers burnt too often and so would point people to the manager with a complaint, or tell them to say it to the gay couple themselves ~ no one ever did.

So yea, I took the story with a very large pinch of salt.

wakka12 · 31-10-2015 03:09PM

frostyjacks wrote: »

I see the gaystapo are out in force again, bullying and shaming anyone who doesn't get on their hands and knees and worship at the altar of almighty homosexuality. Drama queens.

Pretty much every post Ive seen so far has questioned the validity of the source in this article. But yeah anything to get a jab in at the gays

Azalea · 31-10-2015 03:35PM

There is literally not one occurrence of the "gaystapo being out in force, bullying and shaming bla bla" in relation to this incident - not one.

That post got a big bunch of likes too - some people simply do not think.

Gay couple humiliated after being asked to leave Dublin restaurant

Comments