Jump to content

Average age/height/weight/size of posters


Lawgrl78

Recommended Posts

Oh please. They let in attractive people because it's good business. People want to go to clubs with attractive people in them.

 

I admit I don't understand why any club would put a height requirement on women. I don't find tall women very attractive, and I would be surprised if most men do. I can understand a height requirement on men, since many women seem to list "TALL" as their first requirement for a man. My guess is that fat women didn't get into a club and, rather than acknowledge that they are fat and ugly, made up a story about how they weren't "tall" enough to get into the club (because, after all, if they were 7'2" their height and weight would actually be proportionate! :laugh:)

 

For a club to garner exclusive status, attracting a fashion crowd is going to be helpful. Models and people from the gay scene is probably part of that...but it seems highly unlikely that clubs are purely concerned with having a crowd who look like they stepped off the catwalk.

 

I think the likelihood is that while notions of only the Beautiful People being permitted inside panders to consumer narcissism and promotes a sensation of wellbeing amongst those allowed inside (who might buy an expensive cocktail or two to celebrate their elevation to the elite of society) the reality is that club owners are basically concerned with two things

 

a) make as much money as possible

b) keep trouble to a minimum

 

Here's an article about a sociologist's foray into the nightclub scene to oberve how doorstaff assess the clientele.

 

http://insight.kellogg.northwestern.edu/index.php/Kellogg/article/sizing_up_the_nightlife

 

Unfortunately, the meaning ascribed to race in the nightclub setting was related to perceptions of safety. The bouncers (many of whom are Black or Latino) claimed that letting Black or Latino Americans in might jeopardize safety at the club.
Link to post
Share on other sites
Feelsgoodman
I did wonder, when I read that post about the height rule unofficially applied by some NYC clubs, whether it's a form of indirect discrimination against Hispanics who do tend, on average, to be shorter. Here's an article about a club called Greenhouse who were sued for racial discrimination on account of their door policy.

 

http://articles.nydailynews.com/2009-10-19/news/17936252_1_greenhouse-messages-black-guests

 

Unofficial policies to exclude people who look a certain way could easily have the net effect of excluding certain races from the premises. "No fatties"...well, I guess you could say that being overweight is usually a choice somebody makes rather than something connected to the unalterable essence of who they are. Race, gender and skin colour...generally we abhor the notion of any business discriminating against employees or customers on these grounds. If the only women allowed into a club are exceptionally tall ones, or transvestites, that sounds pretty discriminatory to me. Unless, I suppose, it's specifically touted as a gay club.

 

Otherwise, what would be the difference between deciding that beyond a certain shade a person's skin colour renders them "unacceptable" and deciding that below a certain height a person becomes unacceptable? People are entitled to have their personal preferences as regards height, skin colour etc....but when a business applies those discriminatory policies and is supported in doing so by people who meet its requirements (white enough, tall enough) then it's a sitting duck for a legal action. Deservedly so.

I can't blame a high-end club for not wanting this "urban hip hop fiction writer" to have a party on their premises with her entire ghetto crew. Associating with that kind of crowd would be suicide fro any club that caters towards high end clientele. This is not a race thing.

Link to post
Share on other sites
I can't blame a high-end club for not wanting this "urban hip hop fiction writer" to have a party on their premises with her entire ghetto crew. Associating with that kind of crowd would be suicide fro any club that caters towards high end clientele. This is not a race thing.

 

Indeed. I don't think Kid Rock would have a chance either. Reputation, branding is everything to a club.

Link to post
Share on other sites
LittleTiger
Your argument isn't "disgusting"; it's just nonsensical. It's an ad hominem fallacy.

 

If I have a bias against or for a particular attribute -- let's say, redheads -- that just means I am a person with a bias. We all have then, whether it's redheads, or smokers, or divorcés, or people with kids, or conservatives, or people who don't like pets, or whatever.

 

To equate the desire for an "attractive" partner (which is undefinable, since what's attractive to one person won't necessarily be what's attractive to another) with Hitlerian tendencies is to minimize the evil that Hitler represents. The decision not to date anyone with X characteristic is nowhere on a par with the atrocities committed by Hitler. Nor does the slippery slope argument work here, where you next suggest that a dislike of X is just one step away from wishing to put to death anyone who has this characteristic.

 

I haven't bothered to read the rest of this thread as it seems to have taken off in a different direction but just to go back to this point - I was not equating the desire for an attractive partner, or even one with long legs or red hair or whatever, with Hitler's views - that would be ridiculous.

 

I was equating the way clubs discrimate against short, ugly, fat (or whatever) people. Nothing to do with anyone having certain preferences for particular physical charactaristics. Although it has to be said that if waifer thin, ultra tall models weren't paraded as the epitome of good looks in a woman then perhaps the clubs wouldn't be quite so discriminatory. It's hard to say which came first.

 

The club analogy seems very similar to the way black's were segregated in South Africa not too long ago - black people not allowed in 'White' toilets etc is the same mindset as 'short, ugly' people not allowed in certain clubs. In this day and age I'm surprised it's even legal.

 

I'm not having a go at any individual here - just the way that clubs are able to discriminate based on appearance. It's just inherently wrong.

Edited by LittleTiger
Link to post
Share on other sites
I agree it can be a rough experience on the ego and a particularly unpleasant one for couples if they're denied.

 

Not too long ago, I worked at a popular Manhattan club.

 

I can attest to nyc_guy's claim that height is favored since of only slightly above average height, they made an exception by hiring me (I wore 3 inch heels nightly as a result).

 

On later nights, when walking in, I'd see many couples in line.

If I'd stepped outside one or two hours later, the same couples would often still be there, either shivering in the cold of winter, or fanning themselves in the sticky summer heat.

The hope of the doorman is when denied, the couple will move along to darken someone else's door.

But the more stubborn or hopeful of the couples remained to waste their evening standing on line, bickering as frustration set in, determined to be included even at the cost of a nice evening with their S.O..

It was unfortunate on many levels.

 

What did they hire you to do?

Link to post
Share on other sites
nyc_guy2003
I haven't bothered to read the rest of this thread as it seems to have taken off in a different direction but just to go back to this point - I was not equating the desire for an attractive partner, or even one with long legs or red hair or whatever, with Hitler's views - that would be ridiculous.

 

I was equating the way clubs discrimate against short, ugly, fat (or whatever) people. Nothing to do with anyone having certain preferences for particular physical charactaristics. Although it has to be said that if waifer thin, ultra tall models weren't paraded as the epitome of good looks in a woman then perhaps the clubs wouldn't be quite so discriminatory. It's hard to say which came first.

 

The club analogy seems very similar to the way black's were segregated in South Africa not too long ago - black people not allowed in 'White' toilets etc is the same mindset as 'short, ugly' people not allowed in certain clubs. In this day and age I'm surprised it's even legal.

 

I'm not having a go at any individual here - just the way that clubs are able to discriminate based on appearance. It's just inherently wrong.

 

So now clubs are not only Hitler, they're also slavery. Well done. I don't think your value system is better than anyone else's, so get over it please.

Link to post
Share on other sites
LittleTiger
So now clubs are not only Hitler, they're also slavery. Well done. I don't think your value system is better than anyone else's, so get over it please.

 

Nobody mentioned slavery.

Link to post
Share on other sites
What kind of exercises do you do and what body parts do you focus on?

 

i focus on everything while keeping a balance of strength and flexibility. i do a big viriety. free weights, running, yoga, pilates, team sports esp. volleyball, crossfit, etc. i work out long and i work hard.

Link to post
Share on other sites

so sorry my post led to this debate. my best female friend is 9 inches shorter than me. i'd never set foot into one of these clubs.

Link to post
Share on other sites
What did they hire you to do?

My juggling act :rolleyes::)

 

so sorry my post led to this debate. my best female friend is 9 inches shorter than me. i'd never set foot into one of these clubs.

 

This thread was an interesting read, and I'm glad you started it off on a meandering path.

Link to post
Share on other sites
LittleTiger
You just did.

 

No I mentioned apartheid.

 

Apartheid, for the uninformed, and those who think it was the same as slavery are clearly uninformed, was a form of legalised segregation of 'non-white' people in South Africa, which was introduced a long time after slavery was abolished.

 

Segregation of people based on their skin colour is wrong. Segregation or hatred or exclusion etc of any person based on any physical charactaristic is inherently wrong.

 

Call me narrow minded (or whatever you like) for holding that belief, but I'm proud of it.

Link to post
Share on other sites
so sorry my post led to this debate. my best female friend is 9 inches shorter than me. i'd never set foot into one of these clubs.

 

All you did was give details of your height and weight as asked.

 

I saw a video a while back where a couple of black guys filmed themselves being repeatedly refused entry into clubs for reasons that weren't applied to similarly dressed white customers. They seemed nice guys, presented themselves politely and reasonably. Still got barred. Like you (and others) I don't understand how anybody could see another prospective customer being treated like that and think "wow...this place is great. I really want to give it my business."

 

In turning away customers I suppose they can come out with whatever weak reason they feel like coming out with. However, when it extends to dismissing certain staff for the same reasons that they exclude certain customers, it gets trickier...

 

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1352495/Faye-Rex-Stephanie-Jaggers-NY-nightclub-sacked-short.html

Link to post
Share on other sites
nyc_guy2003

 

Call me narrow minded (or whatever you like) for holding that belief, but I'm proud of it.

 

You can have whatever beliefs you want, it's when you start claiming your belief system is superior to everyone else's is when people start calling you out on it. Your values are no better or worse than any other person's and to compare other people's values who are not the same as yours to Hitler or slavery is completely ignorant.

Link to post
Share on other sites
sweetjasmine
In turning away customers I suppose they can come out with whatever weak reason they feel like coming out with. However, when it extends to dismissing certain staff for the same reasons that they exclude certain customers, it gets trickier...

 

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1352495/Faye-Rex-Stephanie-Jaggers-NY-nightclub-sacked-short.html

 

Yes, and if you go after a protected class, it lands you in hot water like Abercrombie & Fitch, which ended up settling for $50 million.

 

Just because a business is private doesn't mean it can do whatever it feels like, and everyone else has to suck it up. If I go to the convenience store, and the cashier tells me they don't serve my race, I have a civil rights violation to report. The only difference between height and race is that the latter is a protected class, and I personally would never fork over a dollar to a sleazy club like that.

 

There's barely any difference to me between refusing service to someone because of their race or sexual orientation or disability and refusing service to someone because their nose is a little too big or their boobs are a little too small or their legs are a little too short. It's pretty sick that one of the Beautiful People who gains entry one week can get in a car accident, end up paralyzed from the waist down, and suddenly find themselves among the nasty riff-raff barred from entry.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just because a business is private doesn't mean it can do whatever it feels like, and everyone else has to suck it up. If I go to the convenience store, and the cashier tells me they don't serve my race, I have a civil rights violation to report. The only difference between height and race is that the latter is a protected class

 

Yep. In the case I mentioned, they've based it on gender discrimination because male employees weren't discriminated against in the same way. If the girls had been Asian or Hispanic, then I think they could have gone for racial discrimination.

There's a European case (can't remember its name of the top of my head) where Asian and, I think, Hispanic air stewardesses were deemed to have been discriminated against by an employer's minimum height requirement. If you can show that one race is, on average, smaller than another, then that opens up the argument of indirect discrimination.

 

I'm glad Teri Woods raised a case. Even if it goes nowhere (and I suspect cases based on refused admission to nightclubs will generally go nowhere) at least it alerts people to what kind of club it probably is. Same thing with the place that fired the shorter waitresses. Maybe average height female celebrities will decide "I'm not going to give my business to/help raise the profile of a club that thinks people my height are lesser beings but are prepared to make an exception for me because I'm a celeb."

 

At the very least, a lot of people who read it and who are either 5 ft 4" themselves or have friends who are, can think "fine, we'll avoid going to that club to save an evening out being spoiled by somebody in our party getting humiliated by a discriminatory admissions policy."

Link to post
Share on other sites
I can't blame a high-end club for not wanting this "urban hip hop fiction writer" to have a party on their premises with her entire ghetto crew. Associating with that kind of crowd would be suicide fro any club that caters towards high end clientele. This is not a race thing.

 

That "urban hip hop fiction writer" is a successful writer and publisher. Most probably a good bit more successful, not to mention wealthy, than the average person frequenting the club that barred her friends from entry.

 

The very fact that you refer to them as a "ghetto crew" demonstrates just how much of a race thing this actually is.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Well, the people commenting at the time were women who were the same size or smaller than I was. It's just that being that thin didn't look good on me. One BF even said, after we broke up, that he had lost attraction for me because I was so skinny. I found a box of old clothes at my mom's house about a year ago, and couldn't believe how small my clothes were. It kinda freaked me out, and I realized they had all been justified in being concerned.

 

I mean, look at the last picture where I was around 148, and then take off 35 pounds. I'd look deathly thin!!!

 

148 lbs at 5'4" sounds fat. I hear you don't look it so it's hard to say. Your pics are not visible.

Link to post
Share on other sites
serial muse
That "urban hip hop fiction writer" is a successful writer and publisher. Most probably a good bit more successful, not to mention wealthy, than the average person frequenting the club that barred her friends from entry.

 

The very fact that you refer to them as a "ghetto crew" demonstrates just how much of a race thing this actually is.

 

Wow, yeah, I read that story. She was talking about family members who drove up from Virginia to go to that club for her book party and were turned away because they weren't the right body type.

 

"Ghetto crew"?? :sick: That's a gross mischaracterization of what happened.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Wow, yeah, I read that story. She was talking about family members who drove up from Virginia to go to that club for her book party and were turned away because they weren't the right body type.

 

"Ghetto crew"?? :sick: That's a gross mischaracterization of what happened.

 

I know. I do think that if clubs are going to operate this kind of discriminatory policy - ie you have to resemble a fashion model or be/be friends with a celebrity to get in - they should make that very clear to anybody booking an event with them.

 

My guess is that they don't want to do that, because they know that once the club goes out of fashion with the jetset they'll be dependent on the unsightly "average" brigade for their continued survival.

Link to post
Share on other sites
FeelingSmall

I'm 4'10''

98 lbs

size 0-2

Late 20's

 

Build I find has a lot to do with it. I have some chub, but I'm built like a tank too. Stocky and somewhat muscular, if I didn't work out on a regular basis and eat properly I could really balloon. If I gain 5 pounds it's VERY obvious due to the height.

Link to post
Share on other sites
×
×
  • Create New...