Yeah right more like giving half price food to half your customers wasn’t turning a profit
I mean to be fair, how do you decide who’s classed as a lady or not?
Hang on, 12 years running and they cancel it after a single man complains? When it’s so popular they’re booked months in advance? No way in hell this adds up
Regardless of whether your in the ‘women’s-night-is-sexist’ camp or the ‘this-is-a-great-loss-for-women’ camp, if the content of this story and the comments are making you angry then you really haven’t got enough problems in your life.
> For the past 12 years The Star Inn, in Lingfield, Surrey, offered 50 per cent off food for women, saying the deal was its way of “righting the balance” in “a world clearly weighted against women”.
Ermmm, I think its a reasonable charge to be honest. It’s the exact same bullshit as when Brew Dog sold the exact same beer at a substantial discount to women than to men. It wouldn’t be tolerated it if the shoe was on the other foot, would it?
The article goes on to say in its closing paragraphs:
> although Simon will keep the night running with deals for both men and women.
Right, so the only thing that’s actually changing is the discriminatory pricing structure is going, but the night is actually remaining. Seems like a company was acting in a discriminatory manner, somebody complained and the company rectified its behaviour. Win all round, no?
5 comments
Yeah right more like giving half price food to half your customers wasn’t turning a profit
I mean to be fair, how do you decide who’s classed as a lady or not?
Hang on, 12 years running and they cancel it after a single man complains? When it’s so popular they’re booked months in advance? No way in hell this adds up
Regardless of whether your in the ‘women’s-night-is-sexist’ camp or the ‘this-is-a-great-loss-for-women’ camp, if the content of this story and the comments are making you angry then you really haven’t got enough problems in your life.
> For the past 12 years The Star Inn, in Lingfield, Surrey, offered 50 per cent off food for women, saying the deal was its way of “righting the balance” in “a world clearly weighted against women”.
Ermmm, I think its a reasonable charge to be honest. It’s the exact same bullshit as when Brew Dog sold the exact same beer at a substantial discount to women than to men. It wouldn’t be tolerated it if the shoe was on the other foot, would it?
The article goes on to say in its closing paragraphs:
> although Simon will keep the night running with deals for both men and women.
Right, so the only thing that’s actually changing is the discriminatory pricing structure is going, but the night is actually remaining. Seems like a company was acting in a discriminatory manner, somebody complained and the company rectified its behaviour. Win all round, no?