• The KillerFrogs

FWST: ‘Racist motive’ for dress code? TCU coach denied entry at West 7th bar over Air Jordans

M

Mean Purple

Active Member
The snow flakes complaining about it dont have to go there. The establishment has that dress code for a reason. And those screaming racism should realize they are exposing their own tendencies for stereotyping. Because they assume the people who would start a fight over a pair of those shoes would only be of one ethnicity.

Frickin millennials.
 
Purp

Purp

Active Member
Frog Island said:
As a couple posters said earlier, yes a restaurant or establishment can enforce a dress code. But the question here is, WHO is this dress code meant for? I've grown up around a multiracial and multicultural environment. I have many friend and family members from different backgrounds and races. So not overt, there is some sense here on who they are trying to limit.

Their website says:
Baggy Clothing (half the white guys I grew up with), Non-Military Issued Camouflage, Air Jordans, Air Force Ones, Polo Boots, Timberlands, Solid Tshirts, Sports Attire & Offensive Clothing

Those are very specific. It does not say sneakers. It specificlaly lists out Jordans and Air Force Ones. Dons't say boots, but specifically says Timberland's boots and Polo Boots. Dosn't say tshirts, but Solid Tshirts (meaning White Ts). Should I go on?

Come one man. If you still can't see it, it's because you don't want to.
Click to expand...
"Their website says:
Baggy Clothing (half the white guys I grew up with), Non-Military Issued Camouflage (my redneck brother-in-law), Air Jordans (half the white guys I grew up with and several white guys in HASMSP), Air Force Ones (half the white guys I grew up with including me plus several white guys in HASMSP), Polo Boots (half the white guys I grew up with including me), Timberlands (half the white guys I grew up with), Solid Tshirts (half the white guys I grew up with, my redneck brother-in-law, and 20% of the white people I go to church with, Sports Attire & Offensive Clothing (literally covers 80% - 90% of the people I know including me)"

The explanation about Jordans seems more than plausible. I bet the same could be said for Polo boots and Timberlands. I have several guys who have worked for me in the past (white, black, and Mexican) who can attest to certain solid colors meaning certain things that can cause conflict. It's perfectly reasonable, then, to prohibit such a thing if it could pose enough of a threat to the club's patrons. I've been in bars where Tech fans (white) went after Aggy fans (just as white) for wearing #12 jerseys.

Should I go on?

If you see something here it's because you want to see it; not necessarily because it really exists.
 
Zubaz

Zubaz

Member
Purp said:
The explanation about Jordans seems more than plausible.
Click to expand...
tenor.gif

Frognosticator said:
People who wear them to clubs and then get in fights with other people who step on them are uncivil.
Click to expand...
Correct...but they aren't just banning getting in to fights, they are banning wearing them altogether. The idea that merely wearing them introduces that incivility is where I would imagine most people are taking issue.
 
F

Frog Island

Active Member
Purp said:
"Their website says:
Baggy Clothing (half the white guys I grew up with), Non-Military Issued Camouflage (my redneck brother-in-law), Air Jordans (half the white guys I grew up with and several white guys in HASMSP), Air Force Ones (half the white guys I grew up with including me plus several white guys in HASMSP), Polo Boots (half the white guys I grew up with including me), Timberlands (half the white guys I grew up with), Solid Tshirts (half the white guys I grew up with, my redneck brother-in-law, and 20% of the white people I go to church with, Sports Attire & Offensive Clothing (literally covers 80% - 90% of the people I know including me)"

The explanation about Jordans seems more than plausible. I bet the same could be said for Polo boots and Timberlands. I have several guys who have worked for me in the past (white, black, and Mexican) who can attest to certain solid colors meaning certain things that can cause conflict. It's perfectly reasonable, then, to prohibit such a thing if it could pose enough of a threat to the club's patrons. I've been in bars where Tech fans (white) went after Aggy fans (just as white) for wearing #12 jerseys.

Should I go on?

If you see something here it's because you want to see it; not necessarily because it really exists.
Click to expand...

We definitely see a difference of opinion here for the most part. That's OK.

I'm basing my opinion on first and and second hand experience in similar occasions in college, high school and a little in my younger days after college. Some dress code rules are targeted to certain individuals. In this case I stand by my view.
 
Froggish

Froggish

Active Member
Todd D. said:
And if a policy is "neutral" on its face but disproportionately affects one ethnicity?
Click to expand...

This is a different issue....A policy that disproportionately affects one ethnicity, while stupid, isn’t necessarily rooted in racism. Sometimes it’s just stupid or out dated...
 
Pure Purple

Pure Purple

KMA
An item's value should have no bearing on its appropriateness and suitability or whether it would be considered

acceptable in certain venues.
 

Latest posts

Top