- This topic has 66 replies, 21 voices, and was last updated 11 years, 10 months ago by .
-
Posts
-
lots of non kosher establishments have dress codes. why are the jewish ones being singeled out?
prob bec it only applies to women.
What mod said. That’s why.
But, don’t they see that this is why our communities are suspicious of them? Don’t they see that this is why we think they are out to get us and then we don’t cooperate in the investigations of molestations etc? What does it harm them if our stores, where only we shop anyway, have a dress code?
They are not being wise.
Someone is trying to sue a store over having a stated “dress code” for customers? Are they arguing that being immodestly dressed is a requirement of a certain religious group?
Unless the store is funded by the government, the case will lose. If they sue in Federal court, the plaintiff will have to prove at least some theoretical basis for thinking the suit might be valid or the lawyer will get fined.
The “penalty” for a store turning away customers is loss of the customers’ patronage.
Perhaps some group is trying to “shake down” a store owner?
Akuperma: I haven’t looked, but my guess is they are claiming it violates the Civil Rights Act or some similar Act, which applies to anyone who provides a public accommodation in interstate commerce. As we know, interstate commerce has no limits, so it applies to any public accomodation.
The same way you can’t have a hotel that is “Whites only”, or “No Jews.”
The better question is if free exercise will trump it. Under Smith, probably not. But Smith is weak.
Who is suing (the government or a private citizen civil suit) and where is this news being reported?
Anyways, it is easy to devise a dress code that applies equally to both genders. Simply ALL body parts must be covered with non-tight clothing except the hands and above the neck. Equally applied to men, women, boys and girls. Viola.
Oy, will the men have to wear skirts?
(Actually, just say the bekeshe counts as a skirt and you’re good.
Equally applied to men, women, boys and girls. Viola.
‘Cello.
a jewish person is suing?
They could just simply institute a dress code for men as well.
Some fancy restaurants and country clubs have dress codes for both men and women (skirts or dresses for women and jackets and ties for men).
The civil rights acts covers, at most, race (ethnicity), religion (requiring reasonable accomodation at no more the de minimis expense), gender and handicap. The common law might require admitting customers who are behaiving in an orderly manner, but wouldn’t allow much in terms of damages.
The initial posting didn’t refer to anything, but it would be very hard to challenge a store over a dress code unless you could argue that it violated one’s religion or that it interfered with one’s handicap. IF the issue was employment rather than shopping, it might be a little bit different, for example, there have been lawsuits (not winning ones) objecting the dress codes. Stores routinely have dress codes.
I checked google and found complaints, none of which referred to lawsuits, and one has someone at Yeshiva University’s law school (which is part of the non-frum part of YU) complaining about the inability to sue over a dress code, and an article in a less than reputable New York newspaper showing some non-Jewish women dressed in a manner that almost anyone would consider more than appropriate for a “lady of the night” than a customer in conservative family-oriented store.
Edited.
Mods
Edited. Thank you for bringing it to our attention.
There’s nothing gender specific except maybe low-cut necklines. That too is interpretation only, the signs don’t single out women at all.
The kasha in this case is the answer: there are definitely those out to “get us”. Our “tolerant” neighbors simply can not tolerate our way of life.
Edited. Do not post links.
Purpleone: The NYC Human Rights Commission is suing. Sounds familiar? Not quite the NYC Health Dept. but both are under Bloomberg’s jurisdiction. He’s obviously set the tone for all his agencies that “black hatters” are fair game.
Sounds to me like an excellent opportunity for the “plaintiff-bar” to sue for deliberate deprivation of civil rights under color of law (which might explain why the case last year attracted a major firm anxious to protect civil rights).
mamele-
oh dandy.. why do they care if the jewish community doesnt??
So basically they’re saying that dress codes are okay, but not dress codes based on religious beliefs. (And these rules don’t require long sleeves for example, so they are not exactly pushing “Hasidic extremism”.)
And these stores serve everybody, not just Heimishe Yidden, or Yidden at all, for all those assuming otherwise, although most Jewish stores have mainly Jewish clientele.
However, I believe these signs were the result of a prior discrimination lawsuit by an employee of one store (and were probably made in conjunction with legal counsel) to show that the same requirements are expected of everybody and thereby avoid further legal trouble.
Obviously, hate transcends logic, hence the lawsuit.
For anybody interested, I did some googling and it appears these signs were first brought up last July by a certain failed blogger, followed by the lovely New York Post.
What I found interesting is that all the scholars consulted then seemed to agree that it was perfectly legal under federal and state laws. I guess they forgot that the city doesn’t need the law on its side to sue, as they are very business friendly…
I used to work at a Satmar Store. Many of the employees were not Satmar or even Chassidish. The store was not in a jewish community.
One Day someone came into the store wearing a pride button. The Sales person (He was not Chassidish, He was Yeshivish) behind the counter asked the person (I am not 100% if it was a man or woman, but I think it was a man) about the button and asked if he was one of them.
The person replied in the affimative, and the sales person said YEECH. The customer then went to the store manager and repeated what happend.
The sales person did get a reprimand, but was not fired
zahavasdad: insulting a customer is a most serious offense for any retail merchant
That is totally irrelevant to stores insisting that customers dress appropriately – which is designed to creatge a cartain atmosphere. Good (goysha) restaurants, for example, expect men to wear jackets and ties, and will ask someone wearing jeans to leave – they don’t want customers to think they are a hamburger joint rather than a fancy restaurant. No hiddush there.
NYC ignoring Federal and State law is part of an apparent policy of discrimiantion, which frum Democrats should complain about (but not too loudly, as they know who butters their bread)
The person replied in the affimative, and the sales person said YEECH. The customer then went to the store manager and repeated what happend.
The sales person did get a reprimand, but was not fired
I don’t share your values regarding this issue.
ZD,
What is the point of your story?
And it would seem that you do not know the story first hand, since you do not even know if the person who was publicly flaunting that they practice a perverted lifestyle was a male or a female.
I notice that that there was no allegation that the pervert was denied service. So it does not appear that anything illegal was done.
The pervert proudly proclaimed that he/she was disgusting and the person who noted it responded in kind that they are in fact disgusting.
What were you trying to say?
This is government encroachment into business.
If a business wants to discriminate, that is their right to,, IMHO, which is why I believe the accomodations clauses of the Civil Rights Act in particular are unconstitutional.
Market conditions are enough to dissuade the type of behavior the city deems unlawful.
rebdoniel: How very Hank-Reardenesque. (That’s a good thing.)
R’ Doniel, I actually think you’re wrong, as some establishments prefer to be selective of their customers to enhance their standing with the majority of their other, probably “better heeled” clients, at least in some cases.
This is not the case here. If someone wants to shop at one of these stores, with a little foresight they can. And even if they decide to flaunt the rules they’ll probably be accommodated, perhaps reluctantly. And I’d probably get the same “look” elsewhere if I enter a shop with a screaming baby. I may not like it, but I wouldn’t get far if I try too sue for discrimination. Both examples are very different from saying we don’t allow Blacks, Jews or Eskimos to shop here, which I would find offensive.
Accommodating alternate lifestyles by forcing establishments to perform weddings on their premises is trickier to argue against legal-wise, although it definitely clashes with their right to practice their religion so it’s not so simple. It’s still not the same as refusing to sell a cup of coffee to someone practicing such a lifestyle, where don’t ask don’t tell is probably prudent.
We also have to realize that going topless is legal in NYC, and if we can’t have dress codes, we’re sunk.
And even if they decide to flaunt the rules they’ll probably be accommodated, perhaps reluctantly.
I try to flaunt rules as much as possible.
For the record, if the store is not an overtly religous store (Like a Catering hall) , but rather a store that generally sells to religious people but not religious in nature (Like a Kosher restaurant) in New York City and State it is illegal to discriamte based on lifestyle.
So if 2 men holding hands walk into a supermarket on Lee Ave, the owner cannot throw them out.
I was in monsey when I was engaged, with my mother shopping for Sheva brachos outfits at name removed. they have a sign that says something like ” you must have covered feet to enter”. I was not wearing tights, but I was wearing shoes.. Oh boy! I will never shop there again. This was a number of years ago and I am still so upset. These chassidish girls maybe they were 10 and 11, about 4 of them were following me around and pointing and laughing and they even dragged their mother over to the dressing area where I was standing to ” show her”. I am NOT exagerating. Mind you the Hispanic sales lady was in Jeans. I finally said loudly ” can I help you with somethig?!?”. The mother looked at my legs and said ” zats no good” and her kids burst into hysterics. Am I the only women they have ever seen without tights??? This was not the manager but I will still never spen a dime there again. It was grotesque behavior.
MorahRach:I was in monsey when I was engaged, with my mother shopping for Sheva brachos outfits at name removed.
I think you may have made a mistake. name removed only sells childrens clothing. Unless you wore a kids size at your wedding, I dont see how you could have purchased clothing there. I have shopped in that store many times and have seen all different types of customers. I have also never noticed a sign on their door.
I personally had a bad experience there myself and it took me years to go back (they have hard to find items). It was right after I gave birth and I went in looking like an over-tired mom. When I asked for help finding something basic, I was told they dont carry it. I was greatly offended.
Maybe I have the name wrong? name removed in the big shopping center upstairs? I was very thin I don’t remember the size but they sell Kiki tikis and long sleeved tops that fit me.
If a secular hi-class restaurant can have a “dress code” (ties, etc.) then I hardly think anyone has the right to argue about a religious store owner requiring a minimum dress code. People who don’t like it can always shop elsewhere.
I had never seen a Tzniut sign with specific details until yesterday in the united states (I saw the big general sign in Me’er Sharim once)
The sign I saw was outside of the whole shopping center basically meaning no flip flops.
I don’t believe in government encroachment on the liberties of businesses. If these Satmar stores want to discriminate, that is their business.
I don’t believe in government encroachment on the liberties of businesses. If these Satmar stores want to discriminate, that is their business.
Some descrimation is legal, Like ” No Shirt, No Shoes, No Service”
However a sign saying No Blacks, No Jews , No Women or no Gays is not
MorahRach, sorry about your bad experience. These girls were obviously immature and untrained, and the mom apparently not a native English speaker, probably lacking social skills. However, if the sign was outside I don’t think that prompted their rudeness.
The people that started the whole fiasco in Williamsburg were not offended, they are trying to make a statement about their freedom to ignore social norms and dress however they like.
That’s the puzzle here, even Zdad seems to agree that these stores were within their legal rights, everybody is welcome provided they dress accordingly. This didn’t stop the city from slapping these stores with an unwarranted lawsuit.
HaifaGirl: you mean like flaunting grammar rules? Or are these the most cardinal of sins? Sorry I couldn’t resist.
I think haifagirl is the only person here who can correctly say that she flaunts grammar rules. ^_^
Just because something might be legal, doesnt mean one should do it.
Ive worked in selling for most of my life and I can tell you its not very smart to refuse a paying customer. Paying customers can be hard to get.
With Chassidic Williamsburg so close to Hipster Williamsburg, these types of clashes will be constant
I flaunt grammar rules all the time. A large percentage of the CR, however, flouts them.
Oops. My mistake.
MorahRach- You are correct. I thought you purchased “Sheva brachos outfits”.
There is a sign outside. I thought it meant you have to wear some sort of footwear. There is a sign saying rollerblades are not acceptable. I thought anything else is ok. Walk into the mall erev pesach and you will find a variety of jewish people dressed however they like and no one will bother them – except maybe the guy that had a model seder outside last year.
Mammele – you are right. Some moms dont teach their children social skills. It can happen to a chosid with his long beard, a person in a wheelchair…. anyone that looks different than the child’s family.
Zdad: this is not the issue here. The issue that almost nobody here seems to find offensive is that the city is targeting us. We need more backbone, we need to fight back.
The first knee-jerk response by a mod to the OP was an assumption that the city is right. Whatever happened to sticking up for our own?
Our collective self esteem has been negatively effected by some recent blows. Time to dust ourselves off and stand up for our Torah with no shame!
Anti-Semitism is not when someone wants to wear a tank top and shorts into your store and spend money , Anti-Semitism is when they go into your area and Beat up and destroy your property or they dont hire you because you are jewish. Or they tell you if you dont work on Saturday you will not get hired.
Do you guys know that in the harrods department store in london, by appointment to HM the queen, there is a whole dress code, and it includes not wearing sneakers
there is a similar dress code for visitors in buckingham palace
There is a dress code to the Vatican too.
Ive been to Harrods and to compare harrods to a store on Lee Ave in Williamsburg is laughable.
BTW London was one of my favorite cities to visit outside of Italy (I loved Rome)
Zdad: I didn’t say, anti-semitism, but definitely against our way of life. If Bloomberg decides to outlaw kashering meat because the salting process increases our sodium intake, would you mind or say he has our best interests at heart? Where do you draw the line? This is when we say we don’t need your sting or your honey. It’s more insidious, but I question the motives.
However, my beef (pardon the pun) is not with the guys “desperate” to shop, but with the city for FILING AN UNFOUNDED LAWSUIT — which is harassment in my book — so your analogies are incorrect.
And you could use some Jewish pride. I’ve been to Harrods — and it’s an opulent dept. Store. If their dress code were to stem from the owners’ Muslim beliefs would you still be gushing about it or would its high-class status be irrelevant? Sorry, but we are bnei melachim and Hashem prefers a modest (in both senses) Williamsburg store on Lee Ave to a glitzy one where he is not acknowledged. And we have the right to uphold His royal banner, laugh all you want.
Good question, Where is the line drawn
Is the line drawn at a woman wearing a Sheital , A hat, Long sleeves, , A skirt down to the floor, , stockings and flats
Or is it of for a woman (who is not religious) to wear moms Jeans, a short sleeve shirt (not a tank top) and normal hair
You’re diverting my question, but I’ll answer anyway. In this case (don’t forget we’re dealing with Williamsburg fanatics out to convert the world…) the signs specify no bare feet or shorts, and no sleeveless or low cut tops.
Since these seem to meet your criteria I hope you’re happy and will start showing some empathy for your brethren.
“Mammele” who said “Williamsburg fanatics out to convert the world.” — NO, they wish to be left alone. They don’t insist that that men wear long pants or that women conceal the “cleavage” – they only don’t want to look at it. The only hasidic group that is out to “convert” anybody is Chabad and maybe Breslov (the ones with the dead rebbes).
It is the world that is offended by the Hasidim’s continued existence. According to all secular social science theory, they should have long since seen the light and entered modern society – and the secular world is highly annoyed by the fact they saw the law and decided that secular society was disgusting. The issue is not about a merchant asking customer to conform to social norms of what constitute proper dress (which in fact, is quite lawful and anything but radical, quite common in all sub-cultures even if the standards vary,and but for secular bigotry is non-controversial since the immodest customer can take their business elsewhere).
Which probably explains, in both Israel and America, why secular Jews are pursing a “Jihad” against the hareidi communities. The issue is secular bigotry and intolerance, not hasidim being properly dressed.
“Mammele” who said “Williamsburg fanatics out to convert the world.” — NO, they wish to be left alone. They don’t insist that that men wear long pants or that women conceal the “cleavage” – they only don’t want to look at it. The only hasidic group that is out to “convert” anybody is Chabad and maybe Breslov (the ones with the dead rebbes).
I took Mammele statement to be sacarstic
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.