Olivia Cruises

sturg33

sturg33

I
Talking to a lesbian co-worker today - and she told me she was going to go on an "Olivia Cruise"... She described it as a cruise for lesbians. I naturally asked if men were allowed and she said "no"

So curious - why aren't there national news events and protests and government legislation changing the rules so this company cannot deny service to men? If the baker has to make the wedding cake, how the hell does this company get away with excluding an entire gender?

For the record - I fully support their allowance to exclude whoever they want... but I know many on here have said in the past that that is treating certain people as 2nd class citizens... so i assume they are vehemently against Olivia cruises as well.
 
Battleaxe Bruhilda, you really don't want to meet.

5'10 build like a fire hyrdant, around 220 pounds and bench press your weight.

You will be her bitch. But licking and hitting that, I don't think would be too bad as she will tell you what you need to do.
 
sturg33 said:
Talking to a lesbian co-worker today - and she told me she was going to go on an "Olivia Cruise"... She described it as a cruise for lesbians. I naturally asked if men were allowed and she said "no"

So curious - why aren't there national news events and protests and government legislation changing the rules so this company cannot deny service to men? If the baker has to make the wedding cake, how the hell does this company get away with excluding an entire gender?

For the record - I fully support their allowance to exclude whoever they want... but I know many on here have said in the past that that is treating certain people as 2nd class citizens... so i assume they are vehemently against Olivia cruises as well.
Click to expand...

Personally I think it's wrong. I don't think they should exclude men. That being said. Men have historically had it easy so I can understand not wanting them on board. What I don't get is why would a man want to go on board?

That being said, similar to other gender/orientation/etc. exclusive groups, they probably don't allow you to book normally. There's a famous lesbian motel around me (famous in the lesbian world, I had no clue it existed) they have a no vacancy sign at all times so you have to be in the know to get in.
 
keithlaw said:
If I identify as a woman I'm totally welcome on the cruise right?
Click to expand...

I'd bet yes. That being said, I don't think you'd enjoy yourself on a lesbian cruise. But who knows. Maybe you like being around people who don't find you sexually attractive.
 
zitothebrave said:
Personally I think it's wrong. I don't think they should exclude men. That being said. Men have historically had it easy so I can understand not wanting them on board. What I don't get is why would a man want to go on board?

That being said, similar to other gender/orientation/etc. exclusive groups, they probably don't allow you to book normally. There's a famous lesbian motel around me (famous in the lesbian world, I had no clue it existed) they have a no vacancy sign at all times so you have to be in the know to get in.
Click to expand...

I don't see why a man would want to go one either... unless he's a perf. But that's not the point. I also don't know why a gay couple wants a cake made from devout Christians... but that seems to happen all the time

I don't see why they're legally allowed to exclude us and treat us like 2nd class citizens. We need a supreme court ruling on this ASAP.
 
sturg33 said:
I don't see why a man would want to go one either... unless he's a perf. But that's not the point. I also don't know why a gay couple wants a cake made from devout Christians... but that seems to happen all the time

I don't see why they're legally allowed to exclude us and treat us like 2nd class citizens. We need a supreme court ruling on this ASAP.
Click to expand...

The Christian Bakers could easily not do the gay weddings, if they just say they're not able to do it and not say it's because they're gay. You have the right to refuse service, but when you're in the public sphere you are at a big risk of discrimination if you make that obvious.
 
zitothebrave said:
The Christian Bakers could easily not do the gay weddings, if they just say they're not able to do it and not say it's because they're gay. You have the right to refuse service, but when you're in the public sphere you are at a big risk of discrimination if you make that obvious.
Click to expand...

I'm kinda torn on this one, I am against discrimination in many areas, but to me that also includes discriminating against people who don't want to business with certain people or groups, unless it's a vital service like police, fire, health care related, etc., stuff that could easily be life or death. If a cake maker doesn't want gay people's money why would they want to push that to the point of a lawsuit? This is the same reason I say there will be lawsuits when a church refuses to marry a gay couple, which I believe they absolutely should have the right to refuse to do. That WOULD violate their right to their beliefs, I think not baking them a cake is just silly, but still their right to refuse to do. Cops or firemen refusing to serve the public because they don't agree with their lifestyle would be wrong, as would a doctor refusing to treat a gay person because they don't want to get AIDS, or whatever other reason that has to do with their lifestyle choice, and this absolutely was done for many years.

One of Bill Maher's guests last night brought up something that I believe is the way to treat this situation and I've said it many times on here, boycott them if they refuse service, if their beliefs are that important to them then they won't mind being boycotted, if they're just being whiny little beeotches then they'll most likely shut up and go on or maybe set up a go fund me account and probably make 100X as much money.

I also think if there were some REAL boycotting groups who actually did their homework and boycotted the right people/companies for the right reasons it could be used to make real positive changes in this country. It would also maybe get some people up off their fat arses (metaphorically speaking, I have to idea if they're overweight or not and frankly I don't care) and get involved in helping make their own country better, instead of just sitting back and letting the government or the courts micromanage every facet of life.

The government can and should get involved in important stuff but having them on speed dial for every time you "have gas" has gotten out of control IMO.
 
zitothebrave said:
The Christian Bakers could easily not do the gay weddings, if they just say they're not able to do it and not say it's because they're gay. You have the right to refuse service, but when you're in the public sphere you are at a big risk of discrimination if you make that obvious.
Click to expand...

Wife won't do gay pictures, she tell them she is not comfortable in doing them the way they want.

They go elsewhere and they thank her for telling them upfront.
 
zitothebrave said:
The Christian Bakers could easily not do the gay weddings, if they just say they're not able to do it and not say it's because they're gay. You have the right to refuse service, but when you're in the public sphere you are at a big risk of discrimination if you make that obvious.
Click to expand...

But what about Olivia cruises? Do they have a right to refuse service to men?

I'm confused why there isn't outrage over this one from the usual suspects
 
AerchAngel said:
Wife won't do gay pictures, she tell them she is not comfortable in doing them the way they want.

They go elsewhere and they thank her for telling them upfront.
Click to expand...

She needs to be fined or better imprisoned. Not my opinion of course, but it's what progressives want. No room for such "wickedness" on her part in the public arena. Pledge allegiance to the rainbow flag and all that jazz.
 
Oklahomahawk said:
Maybe the biggest understatement you've ever made my friend. ;)
Click to expand...

You've seen her work. It's that good. They want the best but when a gay couple come and they ask for a kiss scene she tells them, I won't do it.

They don't threaten her and say they will go somewhere else. She is way too busy and send many people away so they do not harm her business in any way.

Right now, well, you see the pictures she sent from Jordan and Israel. They are on my Facebook, I think.
 
AerchAngel said:
You've seen her work. It's that good. They want the best but when a gay couple come and they ask for a kiss scene she tells them, I won't do it.

They don't threaten her and say they will go somewhere else. She is way too busy and send many people away so they do not harm her business in any way.

Right now, well, you see the pictures she sent from Jordan and Israel. They are on my Facebook, I think.
Click to expand...

Yes I have seen her work and yes it is that good, but you didn't get my double meaning, probably for the better. :)
 
Oklahomahawk said:
I'm kinda torn on this one, I am against discrimination in many areas, but to me that also includes discriminating against people who don't want to business with certain people or groups, unless it's a vital service like police, fire, health care related, etc., stuff that could easily be life or death. If a cake maker doesn't want gay people's money why would they want to push that to the point of a lawsuit? This is the same reason I say there will be lawsuits when a church refuses to marry a gay couple, which I believe they absolutely should have the right to refuse to do.
Click to expand...

See there's a difference though. A religious institution isn't a business. They're not providing goods and/or services for the public. If there was a baker at a church who only bakes for a church, I wouldn't expect them to do weddings outside of the church's functions.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top