jump to navigation

inappropriately dressed, mentally depraved, incorrigibly uncool July 14, 2006

Posted by lagablab in Discrimination.
trackback

aruba-dress-code-2.jpg

This photo was taken last Tuesday, July 11, 2006. We went there to check how Aruba’s dress code is being implemented. We also saw a door sign that glaringly reveals Aruba’s biases and prejudices.

The sign says that clients who are wearing sleeveless shirts, caps or hats, or sandals are not allowed inside the establishment. It also states that the management has the right “to refuse entry to those who are inappropriately dressed, mentally depraved, and incorrigibly uncool.”

Inday Garutay was not wearing a sleeveless shirt, a cap/hat, or sandals, and therefore cannot be deemed by Aruba, based on its own dress code, to be inappropriately dressed. Why then was she told to leave the establishment? Was it because they see her as mentally depraved? Incorrigibly uncool?

Or perhaps the more relevant question is: where does “slippers or flipflops are not allowed” end and “gays are prohibited” begin?

Comments»

1. vince dejesus - July 18, 2006

Any establishment, including ARUBA, should always
remember that “the costumer is always right.” Most
restaurants, bars and kiosks seem to be forgetting
this very important rule. Kumikita sila sa atin,
therefore we deserve all the respect we can get from
them.

Aside from this clearly discriminatory treatment towards Inday, more and more I’ve been noticing impolite servers,
rude and bungling security guards, incompetent staff
wherever I go — mula sa bad service sa SM popcorn
kiosks to ignorant staff in Odyssey record bars.

Bihira ka na makakita ng mga sales staff na alam ang
ginagawa. Bihira ka na makakita ng waiters na alam
kung ano ang nasa loob ng kanilang pinamimigay na
menu. Bihira ka na makakita ng guard ng hindi
balasubas ang pakikitungo sa ordinaryong tao. Bihira
ka nang makakita ng restaurant managers na mas
pinakikinggan ang complaints ng customers kesa
ipagtanggol ang kanilang inept crew. Bihira ka nang
makakita ng managers na hindi barubal ang trato sa iyo
kapag hindi ka nakasuot ng magarbo.
Bihirang-bihira ka nang makasakay sa isang taxi na
hindi bastos ang driver.

Sadly, our service industry has declined dramatically in standards. They have completely lost the art of good service and sometimes even common decency.

This incident in ARUBA is just an example of the
Filipino’s growing lack of customer care and bad people skills. Siguro dahil kasi tayo, as consumers, ay hinahayaan din natin ang ganitong klaseng mababang uri ng serbisyo at pakikitungo sa atin. Pinalalagpas natin ang mga maliliit na bagay… at napapansin na lang natin ay ang mga hi-profile incidents like Inday Garutay’s
unfortunate experience. Imagine kung ilang taong hindi
sikat ang nakaramdam ng ganitong klaseng pagtrato sa
mga bars na tulad ng ARUBA at hindi nagreklamo?
Knowing the Filipino’s passive attitude, pinalalagpas
na natin ang mga ganitong maliliit na sablay ng ibang
tao sa atin. Deadma na lang. MALI!!! Kung hindi niyo gusto ang service, sabihin niyo sa manager at mag-complain kayo. Kung hindi masarap ang kinakain niyong ulam sa restaurant, ibalik niyo – huwag ninyong kainin. Kung mainit ang aircon sa taxi, sabihin niyo na
lakasan ang hangin – kung wala pa rin bumaba na kayo at lumipat sa iba. Speak out. Ipaglaban niyo kung ano
ang tama pero dapat maging mahinahon at maging magalang para kayo ay pakinggan. Huwag hayaang manaig ang galit – may tamang emosyon sa tamang lugar. Baka kasi sa init ng ulo ninyo, kahit tama kayo,
kayo pa ang mapagkamalang mali ng ibang tao.

Major establishments should re-train their crew and
teach them the value of good service and respeto sa bawat customer – ano man ang hitsura at antas nila. Iwanan nila sa mga bahay nila ang ugaling balasubas at huwag nilang dalhin sa trabaho ang pagka-jologs nila.

Ano man lang ba na sabihan si Inday na
huwag umihi sa banyo ng babae? It’s not like he stole
an ashtray or had wild sex inside the lavatory. They should’ve given inday a warning at ipaliwanag sa kanya KUNG hindi comfortable ang ilang mga babaeng customers na may cross-dresser na umiihi sa banyo nila. Kung gawin pa niya ulit, eh si Inday na ang may problema. It’s a simple matter that wasn’t handled well by an over-reacting and obviously bigoted staff named Tintin.

Aruba deserves all the negative publicity they’re getting. And most especially the lawsuit filed by Inday. Ayan, ke-yayabang kasi. Parang sila lang ang anak ng Diyos.
You see, anyway you look at it, a customer was wrongly
treated. And it is not Inday’s fault that he has an
extremely colorful imagination and knows more than one
way of dressing himself up other than wearing a pair
of faded maong pants and a boring t-shirt.

2. INSIDE PCIJ » Senate to tackle bill penalizing discrimination vs lesbians, gays, bisexuals and transgenders - August 4, 2006

[…] Aruba Bar has a long-standing dress code that prohibits the entry of cross-dressing gay men and transsexuals. But Borja said that the restaurant’s dress-code notice only prohibits entry to those in slippers, shorts and sandos. (See photo of Aruba Bar’s dress-code door sign here.) For this reason, the TV talent and gay impersonator has filed a case of discrimination before the Pasig trial court against Aruba Bar and is seeking P630,000 in damages. The incident has caused much uproar among the lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender community and has put the spotlight on two pending bills in Congress seeking to penalize discrimination against the said sector. Lagablab-Pilipinas, the Lesbian and Gay Legislative Advocacy Network, a coalition of various gay and lesbian groups and inidviduals, has ben lobbying for the passage of Senate Bill No. 1738, the Anti-Discrimination Bill, to penalize various forms of discrimination against lesbians, gays, bisexuals and transgenders (LGBTs). […]

3. vic - August 4, 2006

15. (1) Every individual is equal before and under the law and has the right to the equal protection and equal benefit of the law without discrimination and, in particular, without discrimination based on race, national or ethnic origin, colour, religion, sex, age or mental or physical disability.
Affirmative action programs (2) Subsection (1) does not preclude any law, program or activity that has as its object the amelioration of conditions of disadvantaged individuals or groups including those that are disadvantaged because of race, national or ethnic origin, colour, religion, sex, age or mental or physical disability.

And when those rights are gauranteed under the constitution of the land, it can not and should not be allowed to be violated in any form be in signage, language and action. Those signs and warnings will carry no force in the court of law..

The dress code may be legally appropriate, but to discriminate based on sexual orientation, assuming such is the case, is a clear violation of an individual rights.

4. khrise castro - August 6, 2006

i agree

5. Jerico A. Ilagan - January 7, 2007

Tama talaga na ipaglaban ng bawat mahihirap ang kani-kanilang karapatan.Lalong lalo ang mga custumer na minsan inaabuso nang mga negosyante.Pero hindi naman lahat ng negosyante ay masama.Hindi ba mga tol?


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: