Tuesday, May 21, 2013

Lickers not welcome

Mrs Woog recently posted on The Hoopla her response to two dykes being refused pre-booked accommodation in New Zealand because they were dykes. I am usually cautious about going overboard about matters as you never know the full circumstances.

The links are above and I felt driven to make a comment. Mrs Woog is quite a cool person. Good god, my comment is now scrolling across the top of The Hoopla site. Here is what I said.

Regardless of the legality of the owners’ actions, they need to be upfront in their advertising and state ‘no poofs and dykes please’ and spare themselves bad international publicity and embarrassment to their innocently booked guests. They have gone one step further than the usual preface to a homophobic comment than ‘I don’t care what they do behind closed doors…’. They do actually care.

Seriously, they could couch their advertising in discreet terms such as, 'ideal for older married couples'.  Who really wants to stay where they are not welcome.

It reminds me of when we visited Adelaide in 1983 and stayed at a West Beach serviced flat. We booked through the South Australian Tourist Bureau office in Melbourne. It was early days in our relationship and rather than book separate rooms as we would now do, well separate beds at least, we wanted a double bed. The Bureau obliged with the booking, but I assume once the accommodation couple saw two male names on the booking, we had two single beds waiting for us.

Much to R's embarrassment, I insisted, and the beds were pushed together and remade, hardly ideal. Management had changed from warm and welcoming to dour and unfriendly.

Well, that was in 1983 and I wouldn't think such things would happen thirty years later in Australia or New Zealand, but it has.

12 comments:

  1. Now that Mr Rudd has okayed things, all will be well Andrew :) seriously there are still folk around who are stuck in a time warp oui!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Grace, at least they aren't generally representative of Kiwis.

      Delete
  2. Agree with you 100% Andrew, she's perfectly entitled to decide who she wants in her home... but ought to make it clear up front that she has "isshues".

    Perhaps "Only drunken males wearing blue singlet, stubbies and tatts accompanied by foul-mouthed banshee partners welcome."

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. FC, almost feel sorry for her, with world opinion going against her so strongly.

      Delete
  3. Isn't that illegal in NZ given gay marriage and all? We've had several such cases here in the UK which went to a court case and the B&B owners have lost.... their personal beliefs don't count when you're running a B&B/hotel (at least here). New to your blog... good stuff!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Welcome Craig. It seems NZ legislation may be framed a little differently with possibly B&B accommodation exempt from general discrimination laws.

      Delete
  4. Why would you care as long as you paid for your bill what happens behind closed doors is your business.
    Merle.....

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Merle, it is what I reckon, but they are obviously dykes and must be bringing shame on the house.

      Delete
  5. Like Merle said, why would they care as long as the bill is paid? They're in the business to make money after all.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. River, I really wonder if this will lead to a boon in their business or a complete failure, with no guests.

      Delete
  6. ha ha ha lickers!
    Agree with you 100% Andrew :)

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Fen, at lest no-one has taken offence at the word. It could be construed as offensive but I used it for effect.

      Delete