Cyber Nations Forums: Students allege Chicago Nightclub barred blacks - Cyber Nations Forums

Jump to content


  • (6 Pages)
  • +
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • Last »
  • You cannot start a new topic
  • You cannot reply to this topic

Students allege Chicago Nightclub barred blacks Rate Topic: -----

#1 User is offline   El Pilchinator 

  • dammit newbie
  • PipPipPip
  • View blog
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 3,710
  • Joined: 03-September 07
  • Nation Name:Pilchmenistan
  • Alliance Name:Archon's Factory

Posted 26 October 2009 - 12:10 AM

http://www.cnn.com/2...ions/index.html

Quote

Students from Washington University say they have complained to state and federal agencies that a Chicago, Illinois, nightclub barred six African-American members from their senior class trip celebration while admitting nearly 200 white classmates.

Bar personnel cited dress code violations -- specifically baggy jeans -- when barring the African-American students, according to Washington University senior class president Fernando Cutz, who was among students admitted to the bar.

A white student and a black student exchanged jeans to see what would happen, and the white student was admitted while his classmate still was kept outside, Cutz said.


Cutz said his group from the St. Louis, Missouri, school filed complaints with the Chicago Human Rights Commission, the Illinois Attorney General, the U.S. Department of Justice and other organizations after the incident on October 17. The school planned to hold a town hall meeting Monday night to discuss the incident and a possible protest, he said.

Calls by CNN to the nightclub, Original Mother's bar, were not immediately returned.

But a representative of the bar told the Chicago Tribune on Thursday that security concerns, not racism, guided the decision. One day later, a bar representative told the paper the club was taking the issue "very seriously," conducting an internal investigation and that disciplinary action would be taken if necessary.

Cutz said the celebration at Original Mother's in Chicago's Gold Coast section was to have been the culminating event of a two-day senior class trip to Chicago. The party had been arranged with the bar in advance by the student class board, which includes two of the African-American students who were later denied entry, Cutz said.

Cutz said he was already inside the bar with some 200 other students, none of whom are African-American, when the first group of African-American classmates arrived. He said he learned that the manager of the bar denied entry to the six students, and he said the manager told the students their baggy pants violated the bar's dress code.

Cutz, who is white, said he confronted the manager.

"These six [students] were better dressed than I was," Cutz told CNN.

Nevertheless, Cutz said, he told the students to "go back to the hotel and change." But the manager of the bar stepped in to say that he had made his decision and that the six men could not return to the bar even if they changed clothes, Cutz said.

The students became "more agitated" and "set up an experiment," Cutz said. Class treasurer Regis Murayi, who is black, exchanged jeans with a white student, Jordan Roberts, who -- being 3 inches shorter than Murayi -- looked "substantially baggy."

Roberts approached the same manager who had turned away the African-American students, paid the entry fee and was allowed in, Cutz said.


Washington University Chancellor Mark Wrighton sent a letter to Chicago Mayor Richard Daley to express his "most intense disappointment" about the incident. In the letter -- a copy of which was provided to CNN by Cutz -- Wrighton told the mayor that he "can only imagine the humiliation and discouragement these six young students felt ... when they were turned away from this establishment because of their race."

Students also contacted the Anti-Defamation League and the Chicago Urban League. The two organizations jointly sent a letter to the bar, writing that they "strongly suggest that Mother's re-examine its dress code, conduct immediate retraining of all employees to avoid any future racial discrimination or appearance thereof, and issue a formal letter of apology to the six students who were denied entry."


Actually very clever on the part of the students in doing that 'experiment' of sorts. Kind of stomps on any true dress code argument that the nightclub would have mounted.

What do you think? I'd been under the impression segregation had been illegal for the better part of 50 years, but apparently it has just taken on a different name.


also, hello, i haven't been here in a while. how are things?

#2 User is offline   America 

  • The Bringer of Satisfaction
  • PipPipPip
  • View blog
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 5,636
  • Joined: 03-September 07
  • Nation Name:America

Posted 26 October 2009 - 12:42 AM

Segregation is illegal, it hasn't taken a different name, this is just an avenue by the owner to exercise discrimination. The owner, especially since it seems he had a contract with a public school, can not discriminate.

#3 User is offline   Mack Truck 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • View blog
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 1,946
  • Joined: 09-September 07
  • Nation Name:Stevastan
  • Alliance Name:Shroomville

Posted 26 October 2009 - 12:44 AM

It's private property so, even though I think it's wrong, the manager/owner(?) should get to deny entry to whoever he wants for whatever reason he wants.

#4 User is offline   Ivan V 

  • The Silent One
  • PipPipPip
  • View blog
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 568
  • Joined: 25-December 08
  • Nation Name:Yuzhnoye Primorye
  • Alliance Name:Independent Republic of Orange Nations
  • CN:TE Nation Name:Uusi Suomi
  • CN:TE Alliance Name:Ordo Paradoxia

Posted 26 October 2009 - 01:16 AM

View PostMack Truck, on Oct 25 2009, 11:43 PM, said:

It's private property so, even though I think it's wrong, the manager/owner(?) should get to deny entry to whoever he wants for whatever reason he wants.


...except that the student board arranged with the bar beforehand in a contract for their services to the students which included the black students denied entry.

#5 User is offline   Mack Truck 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • View blog
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 1,946
  • Joined: 09-September 07
  • Nation Name:Stevastan
  • Alliance Name:Shroomville

Posted 26 October 2009 - 01:19 AM

View PostIvan V, on Oct 26 2009, 05:16 PM, said:

...except that the student board arranged with the bar beforehand in a contract for their services to the students which included the black students denied entry.


Didn't notice that part, sorry. Then yeah, they should be reprimanded for breaking the contract.

#6 User is offline   edikroma 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • View blog
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 2,258
  • Joined: 20-December 07
  • Nation Name:Aureus Epistola
  • Alliance Name:The Phoenix Federation

Posted 26 October 2009 - 01:39 AM

As nice as the experiment was... an n of 1 really isn't enough to draw a conclusion... come on people! <_<

But in seriousness... if this is actually true... it's pretty sad. It's one sad to deny entry to any person who looks like they might cause trouble, but it's a whole another thing when you change your criteria for entry by race.

#7 User is offline   Moridin 

  • Time to be great again, my lord.
  • PipPipPip
  • View blog
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 4,109
  • Joined: 27-May 07
  • Nation Name:Arafel
  • Alliance Name:STA

Posted 26 October 2009 - 02:50 AM

View PostMack Truck, on Oct 26 2009, 12:19 AM, said:

Didn't notice that part, sorry. Then yeah, they should be reprimanded for breaking the contract.


They should also be reprimanded for BEING HUGE RACISTS AND HOLDING UP A POLICY OF SEGREGATION.

But that's just me.

#8 User is offline   Sargun 

  • There is no mistake like failure.
  • PipPipPip
  • View blog
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 11,327
  • Joined: 10-September 07
  • Nation Name:Sarnungian Republic
  • Alliance Name:Cult of Justitia

Posted 26 October 2009 - 04:45 AM

This same thing happened in New Orleans a few years ago. The Times-Picayune got a bunch of white people who were violating "dress codes" who were for the most part let into the clubs. Once the blacks got to the door with the same violations, the majority were denied in. There were only two clubs who did not discriminate at all and only about three who had a minute difference in the way whites and blacks were treated.

Of course, after the report was front page news guess which clubs saw a sudden drop in membership?

#9 User is offline   Prince Imrahil 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • View blog
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 150
  • Joined: 22-March 09
  • Nation Name:Belfalas
  • Alliance Name:Global Alliance and Treaty Organization
  • CN:TE Nation Name:Belfalas
  • CN:TE Alliance Name:Global Anarchy and Terror Organization

Posted 26 October 2009 - 07:09 AM

Nice to know that racism is still alive and well in the United States [/sarcasm]

#10 User is offline   Kenadian_2006 

  • Mr. Postcount
  • PipPipPip
  • View blog
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 41,880
  • Joined: 05-September 07
  • Nation Name:Kenadia
  • Alliance Name:GGA

Posted 26 October 2009 - 07:11 AM

View PostEl Pilchinator, on Oct 26 2009, 02:09 AM, said:

http://www.cnn.com/2...ions/index.html



Actually very clever on the part of the students in doing that 'experiment' of sorts. Kind of stomps on any true dress code argument that the nightclub would have mounted.

What do you think? I'd been under the impression segregation had been illegal for the better part of 50 years, but apparently it has just taken on a different name.


also, hello, i haven't been here in a while. how are things?


Yea, you haven't. The prodigal child comes crawling back. )):

Also, they should sue the manager or the club. That !@#$ isn't right.

#11 User is offline   Rebel Virginia 

  • Peace Mode Warrior
  • PipPipPip
  • View blog
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 6,673
  • Joined: 03-September 07
  • Nation Name:Rebel Virginia
  • Alliance Name:Rome

Posted 26 October 2009 - 07:22 AM

View PostMoridin, on Oct 26 2009, 04:50 AM, said:

They should also be reprimanded for BEING HUGE RACISTS AND HOLDING UP A POLICY OF SEGREGATION.

But that's just me.

How about no? Rights of the owner to let whoever they want into a club, and deny anyone they'd like. Sure, it ain't fair, but there is nothing in the Constitution saying they can't. Yes, the club should be reprimanded for breaking the contract they had with the students, but anything further is a violation of the rights of the owner. Freedom of association.

#12 User is offline   Lamuella 

  • Flipper! Noooo! Put down that rifle!
  • PipPipPip
  • View blog
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 14,486
  • Joined: 29-June 07
  • Nation Name:Amead
  • Alliance Name:Goon Order of Oppression, Negligence, and Sadism

Posted 26 October 2009 - 07:32 AM

if the report in the OP is accurate, then this is disgusting.

At the very least, the name of the club should be spread far and wide. I'd certainly never want to go to a place like that.

#13 User is offline   Vaal Satori 

  • Eternity beckons
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 4,106
  • Joined: 03-September 07
  • Nation Name:Arkanodia
  • Alliance Name:TPMA

Posted 26 October 2009 - 07:59 AM

I know from experience that this is a very painful thing to have happen to you, and I wish these young men the best in coping with its aftermath.

View PostRebel Virginia, on Oct 26 2009, 09:22 AM, said:

How about no? Rights of the owner to let whoever they want into a club, and deny anyone they'd like. Sure, it ain't fair, but there is nothing in the Constitution saying they can't. Yes, the club should be reprimanded for breaking the contract they had with the students, but anything further is a violation of the rights of the owner. Freedom of association.


I thought this question was settled 50 years ago, when blacks were being barred en masse from lunch counters. Private property doesn't give the establishment the right to enforce segregation and prevent millions of people from living a normal life. If people like you had gotten their way we would still have separate bathrooms and water fountains. Would you be comfortable with such a world?

#14 User is offline   Lamuella 

  • Flipper! Noooo! Put down that rifle!
  • PipPipPip
  • View blog
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 14,486
  • Joined: 29-June 07
  • Nation Name:Amead
  • Alliance Name:Goon Order of Oppression, Negligence, and Sadism

Posted 26 October 2009 - 08:00 AM

it's Rebel Virginia. Of course he would.

#15 User is offline   Rebel Virginia 

  • Peace Mode Warrior
  • PipPipPip
  • View blog
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 6,673
  • Joined: 03-September 07
  • Nation Name:Rebel Virginia
  • Alliance Name:Rome

Posted 26 October 2009 - 08:04 AM

View PostVaal Satori, on Oct 26 2009, 09:59 AM, said:

I thought this question was settled 50 years ago, when blacks were being barred en masse from lunch counters. Private property doesn't give the establishment the right to enforce segregation and prevent millions of people from living a normal life. If people like you had gotten their way we would still have separate bathrooms and water fountains. Would you be comfortable with such a world?

If the bathrooms and water fountains are public facilities, then they should by no means be segregated. However, you're right. By barring blacks the businesses are losing a rather large number of potential customers, but if they want to make poor business choices, that is their right.

#16 User is offline   ChairmanHal 

  • Award Winning Problem Solver
  • PipPipPip
  • View blog
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 4,116
  • Joined: 03-September 07
  • Nation Name:Haleenstar Republic
  • Alliance Name:Valhalla

Posted 26 October 2009 - 08:10 AM

So far we have reports from CNN, who used the students as their source and...?

If the reports are true, then this is pretty pathetic. But before anyone starts throwing race cards around room (and from the looks of this thread it has already started), let's see how this plays out. The university should back whatever legal action the students want to pursue. It would be a good learning opportunity in addition to making sure this gets the legal traction it deserves.

#17 User is offline   Vaal Satori 

  • Eternity beckons
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 4,106
  • Joined: 03-September 07
  • Nation Name:Arkanodia
  • Alliance Name:TPMA

Posted 26 October 2009 - 08:18 AM

View PostRebel Virginia, on Oct 26 2009, 10:04 AM, said:

If the bathrooms and water fountains are public facilities, then they should by no means be segregated. However, you're right. By barring blacks the businesses are losing a rather large number of potential customers, but if they want to make poor business choices, that is their right.


It was not a poor business choice in the 1950s. By serving blacks you would lose your white customers and lose your creditors, because segregation was a societal issue at the time. If you legalize that sort of behavior again, certain sections of our nation will regress back to that time, and we will face renewed civil rights violations.

This post has been edited by Vaal Satori: 26 October 2009 - 08:18 AM


#18 User is offline   Mack Truck 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • View blog
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 1,946
  • Joined: 09-September 07
  • Nation Name:Stevastan
  • Alliance Name:Shroomville

Posted 26 October 2009 - 08:50 AM

View PostMoridin, on Oct 26 2009, 07:50 PM, said:

They should also be reprimanded for BEING HUGE RACISTS AND HOLDING UP A POLICY OF SEGREGATION.

But that's just me.


Ok. How about you punish them by not going there.

View PostVaal Satori, on Oct 27 2009, 12:59 AM, said:

I thought this question was settled 50 years ago, when blacks were being barred en masse from lunch counters. Private property doesn't give the establishment the right to enforce segregation and prevent millions of people from living a normal life. If people like you had gotten their way we would still have separate bathrooms and water fountains. Would you be comfortable with such a world?


I would. Private property is private property. No matter how I feel that club isn't mine and I'm not going to use force to tell the owner how to run it. If people care - and I do, and would follow my following advice - they shouldn't give them any business.

#19 User is offline   Lamuella 

  • Flipper! Noooo! Put down that rifle!
  • PipPipPip
  • View blog
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 14,486
  • Joined: 29-June 07
  • Nation Name:Amead
  • Alliance Name:Goon Order of Oppression, Negligence, and Sadism

Posted 26 October 2009 - 08:55 AM

the law is constantly telling people what to do with their private property, hence there being health codes for restaurants, etc. Why should the law be allowed to tell the restaurant how clean its kitchens should be, but not be allowed to tell them not to bar black people from entering?

This post has been edited by Lamuella: 26 October 2009 - 08:55 AM


#20 User is offline   Mack Truck 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • View blog
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 1,946
  • Joined: 09-September 07
  • Nation Name:Stevastan
  • Alliance Name:Shroomville

Posted 26 October 2009 - 09:03 AM

View PostLamuella, on Oct 27 2009, 01:54 AM, said:

the law is constantly telling people what to do with their private property, hence there being health codes for restaurants, etc. Why should the law be allowed to tell the restaurant how clean its kitchens should be, but not be allowed to tell them not to bar black people from entering?


I'll keep it relevant and say that there is a difference. Health codes keep people from getting sick and even dying, in some cases. Telling a club owner that he has to let in everyone who asks has a negligible affect on everything. I don't care when I get knocked back because there's too many blokes at the place I'm trying to get in. I could complain at some equal rights commission but I don't, and shouldn't, give a crap.

  • (6 Pages)
  • +
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • Last »
  • You cannot start a new topic
  • You cannot reply to this topic

1 User(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users