Siderea

So, this guy brought suit in NJ that "Ladies' Nights" -- where bars offer discounts to women -- are discriminatory against men.

Now, before commenting futher, let me, in the spirit of full disclosure, point out that there may, in fact, be no North American less qualified than I to speak on any topic involving bars and the mating rites therein. I think I've been in a bar, once. A couple times I've been in self-styled "pubs" and a bunch of times to "music clubs" which had bars in them. But I've certainly never been in a bar with the intention of meeting strangers there, to consider as potential mates. Indeed, I can't think of anything else less compatible with my: sexual tastes, socio-economic class mores, subcultural mores, psychological constitution, respiratory allergies (at least locally bars are now smoke-free), musical tastes, idea of a good time and good old fashioned Yankee-Thrift-based sense of how much is reasonable to pay for a beer.

But, let's be serious: this is the internet, so I'm hardly going to let that stop me from shooting my mouth off. Now where was I? Oh, right....

I confess to a certain astonishment that a man would bring such a suit. As I understand it (admittedly not terribly far) the whole points of a Ladies' Night are first to balance the genders (by inducing more women to patronise the establishment) for the benefit of the men who are seeking women, and secondly, to make it more affordable for those men to engage in the lekking behavior of demonstrating his genetic superiority over other male by bringing the female beverages laced with ethanol. Complaining about the institution seems a bit like slaying the goose that layed the golden egg.

But that said, the plaintiff was, in fact, right. The institution of Ladies' Nights was, indeed, sexist, and discriminatory against men.

The problem is that the custom of Ladies' Nights was an attempt, insofar as the second of my above purposes is true, to help men deal with a different, less tractable, issue of sexism. That sexism is in the mating "scripts" which heterosexual women are bringing to the mating game, and imposing on men.

But you can't sue women for expecting men to buy them drinks as part of courtship.

This case has become the focal point for a lot of commentary; it has occasioned a lot of men coming forward to complain about the double standard, wherein women expect them to bankroll the entire courtship. They're right. It does suck for them to be treated that way. Women treating men like walking paychecks is precisely as wrong as men treating a women as walking cunts. And wrong in precisely the same way and for precisely the same reason.

As silly as this court case may sound, it was a success in the way that matters: it got people talking about the custom and the double-standard behind it, and that's the only way it will ever change. To that patron of the Coastline nightclub, I raise my glass in toast.

So this is a reminder to all my hetero-hopeful sisters out there: if you want equality, that means equality of responsibilities, as well as equality of rights. There's nothing wrong with liking being treated from time to time. In fact what I'm saying is it's wonderful to be treated -- which is why men should be able to enjoy it, too! Instead of waiting around for men to impress you, have some ovaries, be a woman and buy a man a drink. Take a man out for dinner. Buy him flowers. Take him out for a drive in your car. Make arrangements for a date -- buy the tickets, make the reservations -- and be the one to say, "I'll take care of it all; it's all set."

It's a lot easier to command a man's respect, both within the bedroom and without, if you're not some pathetic mooch. If you want to be treated like an equal, start by acting like one.