Respect, tolerance and liberalism AKA No straights at The Peel

Our friend Andrew Norton has started a fascinating conversation about respect vs tolerance, framed within the context of The Peel refusing to allow straights and women in.

For a liberal, equal respect demands too much and more than is necessary. For passionate religious believers (and liberal ideas of toleration began with the problems they cause) it is very hard to hold other faiths in ‘equal respect’ without calling into question their own beliefs. But all it requires to tolerate them is to hold off from intimidation and violence.

Indeed, the shift from liberal tolerance to leftist acceptance, the logical result of equal concern and respect, takes us back to where we started before the idea of tolerance took hold. Tolerance challenged the idea that everyone must fit in with a common set of norms, and replaced it with the idea that everyone must abstain from certain behaviours.

The practical differences between these two views came out in the reaction to the decision to allow The Peel hotel to exclude women and straight men. The left blogs I read came down against that decision, because they think that everyone should be accepted equally. But tolerance means letting gay men have their own venues without lesbians who frighten them or straight men who won’t be attracted to them.

3 thoughts on “Respect, tolerance and liberalism AKA No straights at The Peel”

  1. You gotta feel bad for those poor gays…

    They try to be gay at home, they get punished. Gay outside, they get punished. Gay in church, punished by God.

    Leave them a place all to themselves where they can be as gay as they want. Please.

    Also, please explain to me the attraction of going to a gay bar if you’re not gay. And why do lesbians pick fights with men who have penises but are not threatening them with aforementioned penises?

    Those lesbians should take a lesson from the gays. When you get enough dick, you become docile, content and peaceful to the world. Having a buzz cut and size 24 overalls makes you an angry, malcontent poofter basher.

    From a hetero point of view I question the need and importance of this recent legal ruling. I also laugh out loud when I think the patrons who are no longer allowed into The Peel are outraged that their offensive antics against gay patrons are what led to this decision.

    They’re gay, we’re straight, the others are lesbians. Let them be them, let us be us. Segregated, because together we cannot coexist.

  2. Whatever happened to the notion that a person’s home is his or her castle?

    A business owner should have every right to pick and choose who they want to have in their establishment.

    Most nightclubs do it in a slightly more subtle way by making the punters queue for hours as the “guest list” or “members” get to come in and out.

    One of the basic tenents of liberalism is the individual’s right to control their own domain – and the domain controlled by the Peel’s owner can be shaped in the way he wants it.

  3. Right on, Driver.

    Forget words like “gig guide” or “NO ENTRY WITHOUT PHOTO ID”, the most common phrase in the hospitality industry is “Management Reserves the Right to Refuse Entry”.

    More power to ’em.

Comments are closed.