Being discriminated Against

Shelldean

Many many campsites have the no single sex group rule. As other posters have said they've possibly had trouble with rowdy groups in the past, hence the blanket ban. the OP said it was in Newquay where lots of teens go and party, don't they?? Perhaps the owner has had issues in the past with single sex groups???

Googlewhacker

I agree they should just say no stag or hen parties allowed.

mountainofdebt

Googlewhacker wrote: »

I agree they should just say no stag or hen parties allowed.

So anyone with half a brain can say 'us a stag / hen party no of course we're not!'

Does sound as if this is a case of the law of unintended consequences coming in to play here rather than direct discrimination.

Foggster

mountainofdebt wrote: »

So anyone with half a brain can say 'us a stag / hen party no of course we're not!'

Does sound as if this is a case of the law of unintended consequences coming in to play here rather than direct discrimination.

But if they say they are a 2 x gay couple, would you then say "of course ya not"!

suited-aces

ringo_24601 wrote: »

Personally.. I do think it sounds like discrimination on the grounds of sexuality and gender. However, it doesn't sound like a homophobic discrimination.. just poor wording of their policies.

Of course, a company can discriminate on the number of people in your 'group'.. but by deciding a 'group' is just single sex is gender discrimination on each person in the group. It does sound like unintentional discrimination if they don't treat a mixed gender group in the same way as a single-gender group.

Just phone up and book each couple individually. If they refuse a same-sex couple, it'd be direct discrimination and you could happily take the matter to the authorities

Even though the same policy would stop a group of straight males from staying?

unholyangel

Just my personal opinion but i would say its indirect discrimination. Although its likely not intended to be discrimination, it doesnt really change what it is. Although i do agree its kind of a grey area because on one hand, they are a same sex group but on the other, they are 2 couples and the fact that if it would be different if it were 2 straight couples is really the basis for my opinion on it being indirect discrimination. I mean arent they supposed to have the same rights and be treated the same as hetrosexual relationships?

However as someone else suggested, you may find this isnt actually the campsites policy and that you have just had the misfortune to encounter someone with no common sense when trying to book.
Of course you may get people lying (saying they are couples in order to book a hen/stag party in), but that then would be a breach of contract.

The OP also said they had 2 dogs they were taking with them......i suppose theres a first time for everything but who in their right mind would take their dog on a hen/stag party?

There are 2 types of discrimination, direct and indirect. Direct would be only allowing straight couples to book. Indirect is when a rule/policy/whatever disadvantages one group over another. And i would say this is the case here.

Mark_Hewitt

Spot on. We all know the why the rule is in place. But the fact remains that the OP *was* discriminated against here, if only because the campsite owner probably didn't consider gay couples when they drew up their policy.

pimento

derrick wrote: »

So you lied to her?
Same sex couples cannot be married in this country, they have a "civil partnership".

EG question H6 from the 2011 Census;-

- Husband or wife
- Same-sex civil partner
- Partner
- Son or daughter
- Step-child
- Brother or sister
- Step-brother or step-sister
- Mother or father
- Step-mother or step-father
- Grandchild
- Grandparent
- Relation – other
- Unrelated (including foster child)


.

Not quite true. They might have got married in Canada, in which case they are legally married in England. I know becuase my colleague at work married his husband there. For all legal purposes in the UK they are a married couple. Not a Civil whayoumacallit.

WhiteHorse

The camp site operators don't seem to have a coherent policy. They can't even discriminate consistantly!

halibut2209

Mark_Hewitt wrote: »

But the fact remains that the OP *was* discriminated against here, if only because the campsite owner probably didn't consider gay couples when they drew up their policy.

Nonsense.

No same sex groups allowed, wither heterosexual or homosexual. One's sexuality plays NO role at all in this. It is not discrimination.

If you allowed homosexual same-sex parties, then THAT would be discrimination against heterosexuals.