Nanny of the Month: Minnesota bans Ladies Nights

posted at 2:55 pm on July 1, 2010 by Ed Morrissey

Oh, what a night, but the feelin’ ain’t right … at least not in Minnesota. Reason TV picks its Nanny of the Month, and this time the culprit is in my back yard. James Kirkpatrick, the Commissioner of Human Rights in Minnesota, declared that Ladies Nights promotions discriminate against men and are therefore illegal in the state. So much for sophisticated mamas at the nightclubs:

Did any men actually complain about this? The entire idea of Ladies Night is to attract women to nightclubs, which usually have more men than women, and so the single men actually benefit (in general, at least socially) from the promotions. Does it discriminate? Sure, and so do coupons, frequent-flier programs, and a lot of actual public programs, even here in Minnesota, especially on the basis of ethnicity and gender. In this case, these are private enterprises offering promotions in which no one has to involuntarily participate. If men don’t like Ladies Nights, they can take their business elsewhere — which makes the gender distribution even more favorable to those who remain during the promotions.

If the sum total of human-rights issues in Minnesota comes down to Ladies Nights in bars and nightclubs, Kirkpatrick makes a great argument — for eliminating his office.

Meanwhile, Kool & The Gang may have originated the song, but it always reminds me of this scene from The Wedding Singer, in which Jon Lovitz hilariously portrays a sleazy lounge singer:


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Liberals, so eager to make sure everyone has their freedoms, must first take them all away.

lorien1973 on July 1, 2010 at 2:58 PM

Typical. In the name of “protecting” a class of people, the government engages in acts that hurt them.

Thanks, James Kirkpatrick. Thanks a bunch. Hey, next maybe you should go after Men’s Warehouse or Curves.

Merovign on July 1, 2010 at 2:59 PM

The Land of Franken strikes again!

csdeven on July 1, 2010 at 2:59 PM

Minnesota will now be known as Home of the Sausage Festival

John the Libertarian on July 1, 2010 at 3:00 PM

Madness.

Ragspierre on July 1, 2010 at 3:00 PM

Alright what frakking moron complained. Time to revoke his Men’s Club card.

rbj on July 1, 2010 at 3:00 PM

In an age of mainstream misandry, it’s hard not to look at the reasoning here with some understanding.

That said, whatever happened to “we reserve the right”?

MadisonConservative on July 1, 2010 at 3:01 PM

Yes. I have seen a few dumb dudes complain about this, but to take it literally to ban it just stupid.

hawkman on July 1, 2010 at 3:02 PM

Regressive liberal retards…

PatriotRider on July 1, 2010 at 3:02 PM

Waiting for the bars to be closed because the discriminate against people who don’t drink. Please, liberals, stop helping us.

Cindy Munford on July 1, 2010 at 3:02 PM

And why the hell does any state need a commissioner of human rights? I thought the Constitution took care of that.

MadisonConservative on July 1, 2010 at 3:02 PM

Hmmmm… the woman to the far right of this photo. She looks so familiar.

Key West Reader on July 1, 2010 at 3:02 PM

Just when you thought Minnesota couldn’t get more stupid…

Extrafishy on July 1, 2010 at 3:03 PM

I’m not miffed about this in the least. Now I hope he comes out with the male tampon, because it’s discriminatory to have anything designed for just one sex.

Nethicus on July 1, 2010 at 3:03 PM

Seriously, does this guy not know that “Ladies Night” is really for the men? They offer discounted drinks to help “losen” up the ladies so that men who normally couldn’t “score” on their own actually stand a chance? If anything you would think that the National Orgnization for Women would have a hissy fit calling bars that offer “Ladies Night” legal pimps or something.

milwife88 on July 1, 2010 at 3:04 PM

And when is Victoria’s Secret going to start making bras men’s sizes? It’s discrimination, I tell you. I demand James Kirkpatrick do something about it.

DamnCat on July 1, 2010 at 3:04 PM

Next up, oulawing the WNBA, the LPGA, etc.

AndrewsDad on July 1, 2010 at 3:05 PM

Reminds me of the guy who sued the Angels because they handed out free tote bags only to women at a game on Mother’s Day

Mark1971 on July 1, 2010 at 3:05 PM

Minnesota will now be known as Home of the Sausage Festival

John the Libertarian on July 1, 2010 at 3:00 PM

OK, that made me giggle. nice.

search4truth on July 1, 2010 at 3:05 PM

Is it me, or does Nick from Reason always dress in Black or other dark colors?

TimTebowSavesAmerica on July 1, 2010 at 3:06 PM

Minnesota is really sucky.

fogw on July 1, 2010 at 3:06 PM

Crazy, 46 state budget are turning in Greece, but hey let’s not have laddies night. Grrrrrrr..

Oil Can on July 1, 2010 at 3:07 PM

When I hear about things like this, I wonder who the poor victim is that needs protection?

Bars offer discounts to ladies to bring in more ladies who do not frequent bars as much as men do. Men like ladies night, because there are more ladies.

Bar = win
Ladies = win
Men = win
Gay Men = unaffected
Transvestites = potential win
Transexuals = win
Interspecies = tied up outside anyway
Pansexuals = win
Other Strawmen = unaffected

Who is really hurt by ladies nite?

stvnscott on July 1, 2010 at 3:07 PM

Next up, oulawing the WNBA, the LPGA, etc.

AndrewsDad on July 1, 2010 at 3:05 PM

Don’t forget Girl Scouts. And, Ladies Rooms.

fogw on July 1, 2010 at 3:08 PM

If this is discriminatory, then so is affirmative action. So is forcing people thru their tax dollars to fund the health care of others. So is offering free or discounted lunches to some, while others, who actually pay taxes to fund the lunches, have to pay full price again, to benefit from a crappy lunch. This list could go on, and on.

It does however give us yet another glimpse into the minds of liberals, and how they think. Diane Fossey would love this. Liberals in the Mist.

capejasmine on July 1, 2010 at 3:08 PM

Really?

When I was single, ladies night meant more women were at the bar because they didn’t pay cover and got drink specials.

As a married man, its eaiser to convince the wife to go because she didn’t have to pay cover and got drink specials.

Its a win-win for men if you ask me.

Lay-Z on July 1, 2010 at 3:09 PM

Don’t worry. It’s still ladies’ night at my place. So come on over, ladies.

Please!

AaronGuzman on July 1, 2010 at 3:11 PM

This is a step forward for those who support population control.

portlandon on July 1, 2010 at 3:15 PM

I remember in college, our fraternity would pay those lousy acoustic guitar guys that covered bands like the Gin Blossoms or Indigo Girls just to get more ladies in the party. We would resort to many unmanly things just to get more ladies in the house. You can’t help but wonder: who elects these idiots???????

search4truth on July 1, 2010 at 3:17 PM

Will he next be demanding that strip clubs have naked men too?

ornery_independent on July 1, 2010 at 3:19 PM

and so the single men actually benefit (in general, at least socially)….

Umm, we get it, Ed. You don’t have to qualify “benefit”. Sounds like you’re trying to explain your last boys night out to your wife!

BacaDog on July 1, 2010 at 3:22 PM

Is it me, or does Nick from Reason always dress in Black or other dark colors?

TimTebowSavesAmerica on July 1, 2010 at 3:06 PM

Black is the new white.

rollthedice on July 1, 2010 at 3:22 PM

Who is really hurt by ladies nite?

stvnscott on July 1, 2010 at 3:07 PM

Nobody complained. This is just another example of a non-essential overpaid govt employee deciding they should actually do some work and because they have no idea what “work” is…they come up with this.

Ditkaca on July 1, 2010 at 3:23 PM

Is this Kirkpatrick guy a muslim ?

macncheez on July 1, 2010 at 3:26 PM

The only people I can possibly imagine being against “Ladies’ Night” would be some ugly feminists.

JetBoy on July 1, 2010 at 3:27 PM

The only people I can possibly imagine being against “Ladies’ Night” would be some ugly feminists.

JetBoy on July 1, 2010 at 3:27 PM

I was thinking really really insecure men with very small you-know-whats’s.

rollthedice on July 1, 2010 at 3:28 PM

If this is all he can find…time to close up shop.
We have finally made it in America…the worst case of bigotry is guys wanting more women to show up to drink with.
I hereby declare Human Rights Violations DIA (dead in America)…

right2bright on July 1, 2010 at 3:30 PM

The only people I can possibly imagine being against “Ladies’ Night” would be some ugly feminists.

JetBoy on July 1, 2010 at 3:27 PM

I was thinking really really insecure men with very small you-know-whats’s.

rollthedice on July 1, 2010 at 3:28 PM

Isn’t that what he just said? I’ve never been able to tell the difference, anyways.

RINO in Name Only on July 1, 2010 at 3:32 PM

Is it me, or does Nick from Reason always dress in Black or other dark colors?

TimTebowSavesAmerica on July 1, 2010 at 3:06 PM

You better be female…

right2bright on July 1, 2010 at 3:32 PM

And the list of cities for the 2012 DNC convention is down to 3 . . . Where are Bill and Al going to go trolling for women to release their 2nd Chakra if there are no Ladies Nights?

PastorJon on July 1, 2010 at 3:32 PM

James Kirkpatrick, the Commissioner of Human Rights in Minnesota, declared that Ladies Nights promotions discriminate against men and are therefore illegal in the state.

When it’s NOT Ladies’ Night, rich men who can afford to buy a drink for a woman have an unfair advantage over poor men. Ladies’ Night levels the playing field, and eliminates discrimination against poor men, and is charitable toward the poor.

Kirkpatrick is SUCH an elitist, throwing his money around and using the law to prevent poor men from finding a cheap date.

Steve Z on July 1, 2010 at 3:33 PM

The only people I can possibly imagine being against “Ladies’ Night” would be some ugly feminists.

JetBoy on July 1, 2010 at 3:27 PM

More like “angry” then ugly, there is always hope at 2 am…

right2bright on July 1, 2010 at 3:34 PM

If I’m not mistaken, last time I heard of this happening (it did in Jersey in 2004 anyway) the bars countered by holding “Skirt Night – All patrons in a Skirt get $1 shots of Jaeger” or some such. Of course at first it attracted alot of dumb frat boys in skirts, but it evened out eventually.

This is as stupid as the guy who sued Hooters so he could work there as a waitress.

Spectreman on July 1, 2010 at 3:34 PM

Just when you thought Minnesota couldn’t get more stupid…

Extrafishy on July 1, 2010 at 3:03 PM

Is that a challenge?

‘Cuz we’re up to it…

Bruno Strozek on July 1, 2010 at 3:35 PM

Kirkpatrick is SUCH an elitist, throwing his money around and using the law to prevent poor men from finding a cheap date.

Steve Z on July 1, 2010 at 3:33 PM

Good point…Hope he insists on price controls on hookers…

right2bright on July 1, 2010 at 3:35 PM

Minnesota will now be known as Home of the Sausage Festival

John the Libertarian on July 1, 2010 at 3:00 PM

heh

visions on July 1, 2010 at 3:36 PM

James Kirkpatrick, the Commissioner of Human Rights in Minnesota, declared that Ladies Nights promotions discriminate against men and are therefore illegal in the state.

LOLOLOL. Yeah, by potentially getting them laid on the cheap. Sorry guys, no more bar-subsidized beer goggles for you, you have to pay full price now. HAHAHAHAHA

Seriously, whatever they’re paying this Kirkpatrick guy, it’s too damn much.

CantCureStupid on July 1, 2010 at 3:39 PM

Only a loony Liberal could come up with this one!

GFW on July 1, 2010 at 3:43 PM

right2bright on July 1, 2010 at 3:32 PM

Nothing wrong with commenting on a tick a person might have. And for the record, it’s not unmasculine to have some interest in dressing well, not that Nick doesn’t dress well.

TimTebowSavesAmerica on July 1, 2010 at 3:43 PM

And why the hell does any state need a commissioner of human rights? I thought the Constitution took care of that.

MadisonConservative on July 1, 2010 at 3:02 PM

Why, so that insiders like Kirkpatrick can have cushy jobs that don’t require any actual work. Or intelligence. Or common sense.

The “elite” need their high status, high pay sinecures, you know.

LarryD on July 1, 2010 at 3:53 PM

Busting guys that bully tourists into paying them, that I’m not too against, but busting people just because they might be doing it: that’s crap.

As for ladies’ night: more crap. Dude, ideally, I prefer a sausage factor of: 0. Yeah, ZERO. Yeah, it’s not going to happen, and sometimes it actually wouldn’t be good for you (you could need your wingman, your wingman could need you, there has to be intelligence gathering and sharing, etc.). Killing ladies’ night, though, is one of the most asinine moves. Any bar owner that loses business should sue this guy, personally. With all the slip-and-fall lawyers out there, where’s the one willing to take on this class action suit against this moron and the equally moronic government he represents?

Hell, the Goth club I frequent, I think I’ll ask the owner if he might consider doing that. Being vastly outnumbered by Goth girls…oh, yeah…

As for guys (quote-unquote) complaining: it wouldn’t surprise me. Why am I not surprised? Isn’t Minnesota that manly-man state that was stupid enough to elect that man-boobed, long-haired, lying loser of a Navy SeAL wannabe, Jessie Ventura? Yeah. I thought so.

Virus-X on July 1, 2010 at 3:56 PM

The only people I can possibly imagine being against “Ladies’ Night” would be some ugly feminists.

JetBoy on July 1, 2010 at 3:27 PM
I was thinking really really insecure men with very small you-know-whats’s.

rollthedice on July 1, 2010 at 3:28 PM
Isn’t that what he just said? I’ve never been able to tell the difference, anyways.

RINO in Name Only on July 1, 2010 at 3:32 PM

Ba dum tsssssh

rollthedice on July 1, 2010 at 3:58 PM

John the Libertarian on July 1, 2010 at 3:00 PM

According to Kagan the government can tell you what to eat. So they’ll probably ban the sausage as unhealthy next.

chemman on July 1, 2010 at 4:05 PM

I’m gonna sue women, since I can’t have a baby! I will get men from all over to join me and make it a class action law suit against every woman. Then the govt will have to say, no woman can have babies.

I wonder if that is on the “To Do:” list of liberals as well.

jeffn21 on July 1, 2010 at 4:09 PM

According to Kagan the government can tell you what to eat. So they’ll probably ban the sausage as unhealthy next.

chemman on July 1, 2010 at 4:05 PM

You know, if the govt can ban things that are unhealthy, then the govt should ban sex outside of marriage, especially homosexual sex. Both of these are proven to spread various STDs.

The Republicans should ask the homosexuals if they like that scenario, because technically it is the same argument. Homosexuals should be anti-liberal, because afterall there aren’t enough of them to win an election by themselves and the last thing they should want is for the govt to be making decisions about their lives.

jeffn21 on July 1, 2010 at 4:13 PM

It’s been 40 years since Judge Mansfield ruled against McSorley’s Old Ale House in New York. They had not served women in 116 years, (despite being owned by a woman) when he declared that as a public accomodation, (since they had a license from the state) they had to admit women.

For the next sixteen years, McSorley’s only had one bathroom.

Equality means many things.

Wander on July 1, 2010 at 4:15 PM

Here is the tool who complained. Doubt he could get any action in a brothel with a fistful of Benjamins. Rather disappointing that Pawlenty just appointed the commissioner to his position earlier this month.

Aviator on July 1, 2010 at 4:16 PM

Aviator on July 1, 2010 at 4:16 PM

I’ll take your word for it. I’m not interested in seeing any more visual pollution today.

chemman on July 1, 2010 at 4:19 PM

Gee,Mr. Kirkpatrick, why stop there?

What about all those Kids eat free promotions at restaurants?

Free shaves with a haircut at barbershops?

Those 2 for 1 early bird specials for senior citizens at IHOP?

You just opened up one big ol’ can of worms for yourself, didn’t ya, suckah.

leilani on July 1, 2010 at 4:21 PM

I’m gonna sue women, since I can’t have a baby! I will get men from all over to join me and make it a class action law suit against every woman. Then the govt will have to say, no woman can have babies.

I wonder if that is on the “To Do:” list of liberals as well.

jeffn21 on July 1, 2010 at 4:09 PM

Don’t give them any ideas. They’ll just outlaw babies, and then we’ll have free, mandiatory abortions for everyone (regardless of gender).

Laura in Maryland on July 1, 2010 at 4:29 PM

I’m gonna sue women, since I can’t have a baby! I will get men from all over to join me and make it a class action law suit against every woman. Then the govt will have to say, no woman can have babies.

I wonder if that is on the “To Do:” list of liberals as well.

jeffn21 on July 1, 2010 at 4:09 PM

What do you think the purpose of the whole abortion industry is?

Slowburn on July 1, 2010 at 4:32 PM

Howzabout three cheers for “Skirt & Pumps Night” at Minnesota nightclubs?

Can’t wait to see how the ingenuity of the market circumvents this ridiculous edict.

IronDioPriest on July 1, 2010 at 4:43 PM

“Bra on the outside” night.

IronDioPriest on July 1, 2010 at 4:43 PM

Lipstick and eye shadow night

IronDioPriest on July 1, 2010 at 4:44 PM

“Shaved legs and armpits” night

IronDioPriest on July 1, 2010 at 4:44 PM

How does this rule work for gay bars where every night is ladies night? Or do they get the Google exemption?

Buy Danish on July 1, 2010 at 4:57 PM

James Kirkpatrick, the Commissioner of Human Rights in Minnesota, declared that Ladies Nights promotions discriminate against men and are therefore illegal in the state.

wow, that’s an interesting state constitution. Usually, a “legislature” votes on a bill for it to be law. Minnesota just gave this Kirkpatrick demi-god powers?

joeindc44 on July 1, 2010 at 4:58 PM

Holy batsquat! Did anyone else think that Lovitz was Kagan on kareoke night?

Laura in Maryland on July 1, 2010 at 5:00 PM

The entire idea of Ladies Night is to attract women to nightclubs, which usually have more men than women, and so the single men actually benefit (in general, at least socially) from the promotions.

That logic exposes why the leftists MUST shut down Ladies’ Night. It promotes heterosexuality, by attracting women to meet single men.

malclave on July 1, 2010 at 5:04 PM

I’m gonna sue women, since I can’t have a baby!

jeffn21 on July 1, 2010 at 4:09 PM

I’m not sure how that will go. I think it’s already been determined that that is nobody’s fault, not even the Romans.

We’d be happy to call you Loretta, though.

malclave on July 1, 2010 at 5:06 PM

Several other states have also banned “ladies night” or special prices for women. I think Michigan and Illinois both did.

Jimbo3 on July 1, 2010 at 5:22 PM

Algore is still running ladies nights. He offers warm hospitality. For some reason Tiger (cheetah) Woods is not allowing black girls past the bouncer.

seven on July 1, 2010 at 7:26 PM

The state has no constitutional authority to do this.

This illegal law should be ignored, and this Kirkpatrick clown should be giver the finger.

Dave R. on July 1, 2010 at 9:08 PM

And why the hell does any state need a commissioner of human rights? I thought the Constitution took care of that.

MadisonConservative on July 1, 2010 at 3:02 PM

Remember, Minnesota shares a border with …… Canada – another haven of Human Rights Commission dumbassery.

Apparently this is contagious. Will the vaccine be covered by Obamacare??

dissent555 on July 2, 2010 at 12:33 AM

Will he next be demanding that strip clubs have naked men too?

ornery_independent on July 1, 2010 at 3:19 PM

And if so they must be gay.

Dr. ZhivBlago on July 2, 2010 at 1:19 AM

Political Correctness is a Communist invention designed to dismantle democratic countries.

At this rate, Minnesota will be flushing the toilet on themselves by noon tomorrow.

Winghunter on July 2, 2010 at 2:15 AM

Several other states have also banned “ladies night” or special prices for women. I think Michigan and Illinois both did.

Jimbo3 on July 1, 2010 at 5:22 PM

-As always, you are so helpful.

Inanemergencydial on July 2, 2010 at 7:04 AM

Nick, nice gig showing how discriminating it is to men who are barred (which they are not) they are welcome and pay twice as much just to be there.

MSGTAS on July 2, 2010 at 10:49 AM