EmergePeoria thinks the City of Peoria is a little inconsistent when it comes to not discriminating against “protected classes” of citizens.
At issue is the City’s recent smackdown of the Elbo Room bar. In case you’ve been out of town for several weeks and missed the story, here’s the scoop: the owner of the bar posted a sign outside stating, “We are not a gay bar. We are a karaoke bar. […] Diesel is down the street.” (“Diesel” is, in fact, a gay bar.) There were protests, allegations of “homophobia” and other histrionics in response to this perceived discrimination. Then the City’s deputy liquor commissioner (Councilman Eric Turner) stepped in and sent the owner a letter threatening to revoke his liquor license and take other legal action if he were observed to be discriminating against gays in the future.
The thing is, the City didn’t take similar action against other bars that had been turning away black patrons on the pretense of dress code violations. EmergePeoria observes:
In 2007 the Downtown Peoria bars were unaccepting of Black citizens supposedly because of their dress and demeanor which was considered to be “intimidating”. Instead of making downtown bars comply in the acceptance of Black patrons, the City Council, under the leadership of Mayor Ardis, undertook the notion of liquor expansion to have alternate places for “Blacks to go”…. In other words, the rights of Blacks are not protected, were minimized and only compartmentalized by this city and it’s council, whereas the rights of gays have been expressed to have somehow been protected.
In April 2003, the City added “sexual orientation” to its list of individuals or groups against which you cannot discriminate relating to employment and public accommodations. Already on that list: race. Yet that group is not being as stridently defended by the Deputy Liquor Commissioner as the newest addition. Why? Is separate-but-equal okay for some groups but not others in the eyes of the City?
EmergePeoria is right — there is definitely some inconsistency going on here.
But CJ, you’re presuming that the patrons are being turned away because they are African American and not on the basis of their non compliance with a stated dress code that is enforced by the establishments regardless of race. That would seem to be a difficult allegation to prove. My own (caucasian) daughter was refused entry at a Main Street joint because she was wearing a sports logo shirt in violation of the dress code. As long as it’s enforced equally for all comers, that should be okay.
I went looking at the Code last night… there are anti-discrimination ordinances covering housing (renting buying etc.) and for employing people. I could find nothing that explicitly covered patrons/customers or some sort of blanket (covers all things) anti-discrimination statement, which I found surprising.
There is an exception for religious groups/churches.
Steve J — Is there any evidence that the Elbo Room actually denied service to anyone?
Mahkno — Sec. 17-143. “Public accommodation” is defined in 17-142 as “a business, accommodation, refreshment, entertainment, recreation, or transportation facility of any kind, whether licensed or not, whose goods, services, facilities, privileges, advantages or accommodations are extended, offered, sold, or otherwise made available to the public. By way of example, but not of limitation, “a place of public accommodation” includes facilities of the following types: inns, restaurants, eating houses, hotels, soda fountains, soft drink parlors, taverns, roadhouses, barbershops, department stores, clothing stores, hat stores, shoe stores, bathrooms, restrooms, theaters, skating rinks, public golf courses, public golf driving ranges, concerts, cafes, bicycle rinks, elevators, ice cream parlors, railroads, buses, stages, airplanes, streetcars, boats, funeral hearses, crematories, cemeteries, and public conveyances on land or water or air, public swimming pools and other places of public accommodation and amusement.”
These codes were originally written because of bloody (and deadly) activities that were committed by motorcycle clubs.
Dress code? You mean cultural code?
“Yeah… if them darkies just dress like us, talk like us, act like us and be just like us… then we might let them come into our businesses. These, ahem, dress codes will also keep our white yoots from emulatin’ them darkies.”
I don’t think the purpose of the sign was to discourage gays from going to the elbow room.. that wouldn’t be good business… I think it was an announcement to straights not to be intimidated or frightened to come in. And… as a matter of fact, if you are looking for a “gay bar”, there is one just down the street.
I have been to “gay bars” and I have been to bars that had a regular group of gays and straights that went to it… I preferred the “mixed” crowd. I do not go to “gay bars”, anymore, just as I don’t go to redneck cowboy bars.. and for the exact same reason.
Why wouldn’t someone like Emerge use her skills to address the undeniable behavioral issues of Peorias youth instead of trying to change the publics reaction to them? Talk about an elephant in the room.
“Why wouldn’t someone like Emerge use her skills to address the undeniable behavioral issues of Peorias [sic] youth instead of trying to change the publics reaction to them?”
Because she’s using to point out the undeniable hypocrisy of Peoria’s ADULTS.
What’s the elephant in the room? That she’s black? And since she’s black she can’t have any insight into the issues facing minorities in the area?
I have no idea what management of Elbo Room may have done or not done aside from posting the bizarre sign. I trust the city council’s action was just a matter of protecting (or creating the perception of protecting) a particular constituency singled out by Elbo Room’s sign.
BTW, the PJS story identified Elbo Room as a “west bluff bar.” Is is actually part of the downtown cluster on Main Street?
“undeniable behavioral issues of Peorias youth”
’nuff said
“protected classes” of citizens. Now there’s an offensive term if ever there was one. When are we going to abolish the notion that some citizens deserve more “protection” than others?
When we eliminate the need for it.
Big Al’s turned away one guy (a Caterpillar HQ employee) who had the audacity to wear a poloshirt and Khaki pants.
Let’s just say he wasn’t white.
Strip joints and dress codes… what is wrong with this picture?
I wonder if they would treated him differently if he were wearing 8 inch plastic platforms?
If you all would remember one of the TV station did a test at the downtown bars where they sent in whites and then blacks with idential clothing and the whites were let into the bars and the blacks were not. I amd not sure which of the stations did it but it is interesting that this type of discrimination is allowed and another is jumped on right away.
The City has known that downtown bars discriminate and has done nothing about it.
Let me provide one viewpoint on this downtown bar dress code business. It may help explain what led up to this discrimination which was captured on film.
As a customer, when I would want to have a cold one and juxtapose a few opinions at the public-bar footrail, I was not appreciative of a sudden new(at the time) phenomena… bar pirates who hang in big groups which eventually number over 100 people, crowd out the regulars who have come there for years, take all the stools and tables, then order sodas and pull their own booze bottles from baggy pants.
A business cannot endure those types of behaviors and, indeed, a number of bars in 600 block of Main were run out of business by this piracy behavior, resulting in their need to find other venues and extend operations into the 500 block.
The servers weren’t exactly thrilled when groups took up their entire section, and would wanna sit there from midnight to four AM and purchase an order of potato chips. Ooh Big Tip
Often they would become indignant when asked to move along.
I have no hardship if the place is crowded as long as the server and the business are making money.
What server wants to see their regular customers subjected to continual pan handling, “Buy me this. Buy me that.”
Before the dress code, it got to be like why come here and put up with this hooey?
Then there is the safety factors. I’m sure no one would think of hiding sidearms in their baggy clothing, because that’s against the law and life is so valuable. *sarcasm*
The dress code was necessary in my view for the business to survive, but yeah, there is still discrimination. I don’t think it is from the owners but from the minimum wage knucklehead kids at the door who maybe don’t handle things as well as the owners would like.
Um… back in college, if you brought your own booze into the bar… you got a polite or sometimes not so polite escort out of the premises by a crew of very large bouncers.
“bar pirates”
“Then there is the safety factors. I’m sure no one would think of hiding sidearms in their baggy clothing, because that’s against the law and life is so valuable. *sarcasm*”
“minimum wage knucklehead kids”
And people think I have issues…
KCDAD: Piracy only in the sense that large areas of server’s sections were commandeered, the servers were, at times, left virtually penniless, and if the behaviors were left unchecked, it would be enough to sink a business.
If a kid at the door can’t evenly enforce a dress code or plays favorites, that kid qualifies as a knucklehead in my book.