Viewport width =
March 19, 2008 | by  | in Online Only |
Share on FacebookShare on Google+Pin on PinterestTweet about this on Twitter

Discrimination’s Good Sometimes (Jackson does a U-turn)

It had to be said.

Most other websites, media outlets and such sided with Mr. Levido. I however chose not to because I do not want to see NZ become a litigious state like the US where if some one has a petty issue with someone else it is sorted out with great cost through a legal system that should be dealing with more important matters.

I do not think that asking for a $1000 for humiliation, and a $1000 bar tab are justified in this case.

What was intended was to point out some inadequacies in the Human Rights Act. I agree with Chris when he says: “We should not be punished because the state chooses to dislike our prejudices and beliefs.” Debate is one of the cornerstones of our society. Our parliament debates, Courts of law have debates, we debate for fun, and we debate on this website. I was taking the, obviously, unpopular, side in this debate.

I am sorry for insulting Mr. Levido, this was not intended. I retract and withdraw my previous blog post. 

I would like to extend the hand of friendship to Mr. Levido and bury the hatchet over a quiet beer in the Big K, or another such establishment of his chosing.

We tried calling Mr. Levido this morning but his phone was engaged. Norman, if you would like to call us again at a time of your choosing please do so on 04 463 6766.

Share on FacebookShare on Google+Pin on PinterestTweet about this on Twitter

About the Author ()

The editor of this fine rag for 2009.

Comments (28)

Trackback URL / Comments RSS Feed

  1. Chris says:

    A few points
    – The HRC cannot order damages like he has claimed. Initially there will be mediation between the bar and the complainant. Nothing will happen. If he wants compensation he needs to make a claim to the Human Rights Review Tribunal, after the mediation is unsatisfactory.

    – If the facts are true as alleged, then he has a good case. It is plainly unlawful to discriminate in the provision of goods and services on the grounds of age.

    – Jackson, do you think bars should be able to deny entry to people on the basis that they are black (or white?) How about the hotel recently in the NT in Australia which refused accommodation to a group of Aborigines on the basis of their ethnicity?

    – your comment that ‘What is the first thing you think when you see an older man, walking into a bar filled predominantly with young girls” is ridiculous. Certainly you don’t believe in innocent until proven guilty. If he caused a problem he can be kicked out. But to deny him entry on the basis that he “may” cause a “problem” is unlawful.

    – As an aside I think your comments about how bars discriminate all the time reveals the stupidity of the HRA. You are right. The bouncer’s mistake was to say to him that he was “too old” for the bar, rather than politely declining entry on the grounds of dress standard or something. In the same way that racist employers don’t hire Maori people because the “job is not right for them”, and make receiptionists don’t get hired for law firms – only attractive females.

    The solution is to allow private businesses and individuals the ability to exercise freedom of association and and choice and recognise that discrimination is entirely natural. We should not be punished because the state chooses to dislike our prejudices and beliefs.

  2. Jackson Wood says:

    Chris’s guide to being a responsible bigot?
    (I mean this in a friendly jocular way)

    I do believe in innocent until proven guilty. I also believe that people make choices. If he was looking for a quiet drink why go to Big K? Bad choice for a quite drink. Good choice to do other things. People cannot chose to their race or colour, or if they’re beautiful.

    I agree with you with your last two paragraphs. The HRA is contradicted by many aspects of society. It seems weird that an individual can exercise free speech and be openly ageist, but as soon as a business wants to be ageist that is illegal.

  3. Russell says:

    But Jackson, you just said that business *wasnt agest* .You implied he was discriminated because he was a lecher. Make up your fucken mind, boy

  4. Alan Shore says:

    All old people must die!

  5. matt the truck says:

    What if, say Chris Renwick went to the Big K… he is a student.. and is ‘old’… so, does he have the right to go to stuent pubs.. or is he a leach?

  6. Brunswick says:

    Norman’s actually a nice guy. When the Big Kumara was in Cuba St, there were often regulars in their fifties (and older) who drank there without incident – they’d been drinking there since before it became a student bar!

    The first thing I think when an older man walks into a bar full of young girls is that he must be the owner… and the girls are in much more danger from guys their own age.

  7. fuck this is gold…

    karma

  8. Russell says:

    Hey Proctor, what do you know about Chris Renwick?

  9. Burn Jackson buuuuuuuurn, you cunt.

  10. Jackson, I disagree with you. Although bars, like other groups, can try and atract certain people (i.e. a restraunt which only wants rich people eating there can charge high prices) to eject someone simply because of their age is unacceptable. How about rejecting people becuase of their race? To throw someone out because they are old is unacceptable.

    “The bouncer’s mistake was to say to him that he was “too old” for the bar, rather than politely declining entry on the grounds of dress standard or something. In the same way that racist employers don’t hire Maori people because the “job is not right for them”, and make receiptionists don’t get hired for law firms – only attractive females.” I find this distirbing.

    I know very very little about bars, and hardly ever visit them, and have never bought a drink in a single one ever, so I would have no idea of which bars are and aren’t for students. So if I were old, apart from the fact I would be unlikely to want to go into the bar, it could easily happen to me. If it did, I would feel very offended.

    Also distirbing is given his refusal to drink at The Establishment on Monday night, a bar owned by the same company. It looks like a deliberate policy.

    I do agree the compensation is pretty high. But a clear message needs to be sent out that ageism is unaceptable.

  11. Oooo Jackson got O’Kaned. Zing!

  12. Neilson says:

    Based on the quote from the bouncer in the article that when he tried to go into Establishment that “You know you’re not allowed in here” I would suspect that there is more to this story that what was in the article.

    Regards
    Alexander

  13. Lol you’re a douche Jackson.

  14. Jackson Wood says:

    Thanks Mr. Reyners. Your column is now pulled from the production folder and I shall urinate on your children.

    But seriously I posted a controversial topic to get answers about what ya’ll think.

    Conrad: Good save douchebag

  15. Kerry says:

    “On the night of 27th February, the Big Kumara Bar was hosting an Orientation event for new VUW students. Many were encouraged to go to their first big night out on the town with Happy Hour vouchers, which had been distributed by VUWSA exec officers during the Clubs Day event in the Kelburn campus Quad earlier that day.

    If I had an 18-year-old daughter, newly arrived at a hostel, who was out on the town with her classmates in a new city, I’d be damned glad that the Bouncers at the student bar had the sense to ask an older gentleman (face it, grandfather-age), not to enter a function being run for mostly teenage drinkers.

    Or am I terribly old-fashioned?

    There are plenty of other bars adjacent to the Big Kumara, and not far from the Dixon St bus stops, which cater to a more mature clientele. And bars do have an obligation, not just a right, to filter clientele in order to prevent bigger problems later in the evening!”

    re-posting my original comment from stuff website, responding to the Dompost article.

    Russell:
    Yes, there have been many incidences of inappropriate behaviour from Mr Renwick, I can personally vouch for having told him, loudly, to “f* off!”, one day at VUWSA reception, when he was harassing me to provide personal information that I did not want him to know.
    He has been banned, or warned off, from many areas on campus, and removed from responsible positions in student organisations, due to his ongoing use of those positions to make inappropriate advances to female students. Of any age…

  16. Hellz says:

    I agree that an old man wanting to gain entry into a student pub, on a student drinking night, is a bit disturbing. But the bars had no right to refuse him entry. I have been in bars where men have been removed for inappropriate behaviour, and if this was the case, then the bar staff would be within their rights to remove him. However it is not a crime to want entry into a public bar. I think he has a very good case.

  17. Norman Levido says:

    Jackson I cant believe that you managed to somehow find yourself as the political writer for a university newspaper.After your vicious comments about me I can only say that your comments are totally outrageous. Point one my friend is one day you too will be an older man and one day you may read such comments,and they will sting, but hopefully you will have the peace of mind and strength of character to not let them upset you too much.point two,if you knew me or even met me you would probably have the powers of observation to see that I am not a lecherous predator of drunken young women,which is what you strongly insinuate without even knowing me;as a so called political editor this is really bad form,in fact I so seem to recall the days when university writers werent right wing l
    sympathizers,who would come down on the side of a man who owns several bars some of which cater specifically to the needs of intoxicated young women.I neednt mention that under current law it is in fact illegal to serv obviously intoxicated people but Andew seems to get around that just like he gets around the fact that the reason he doesnt directly own any of these bars is due to his past record. Anyway all that aside,I have no particular beef with this gentle man,after all Im just some silly olds scroate who tried to give him some of my hard earned cash,whilst.upon invitation was meeting my Godson and a couple of his friends after an evening of doing a couple of portraits at the Hummingbird Bar and Cafe,which is such a classy joint they may even let you in Mr Woods,I am a gentleman of the city and have never,apart from an admiring sideglance at the beauty of youth,ever approached anyone of any age in a manner that could be classifyed as sleazy.I wonder if Mr Gibson could say the same. All this may be resolved in an upcoming evening when Mr Gibson will be hosting a Golden Oldies evening at the Big Kumura,where I shall be,along with TV One cameras. Come on up,my first impression of your words were sadness and outrage and I wanted to but was advised against calling you a purile wanker,because you may be,somewhere in there,a fine writer with a sound judment of your subject,but what you wrote about me was wildly inaccurate and did not do you any justice. sincerely Norman Levido

  18. Nice use of commas. I think you’ll find Jackson’s a raging bolshevik, and commented above that he was just taking the piss. Furthermore, here you are making allusions about Andrew Gibson whilst saying it’s not okay to make allusions about people one doesn’t know.

  19. What did I say when you wrote this Jackson! WHAT DID I SAY…!

  20. Chris says:

    Norman you should sue Jackson for defamation.

  21. Cicero says:

    Laura McQuillan: Furthermore here you are making allusions about Andrew Gibson whilst saying it’s not okay to make allusions about people one doesn’t know

    Didn’t stop you from doing that last year or your boyfriend this year…

  22. Laura McQuillan says:

    Cicero – I would love to see an example of me making allusions about people I don’t know. You’re welcome to provide one, if only you can find one.

    I’m not responsible for what Jackson writes (the leash isn’t that tight), so your point is…?

    Hey Jackson, how come you’re retracting your post? What was Levido’s threat to Salient which made you do so? I think readers should know.

  23. Jackson Wood says:

    Mr. Levido mentioned the possibility of launching legal action against Salient. So Tristan and I decided to withdraw the blog post from the site. As stated above we apologise to Mr. Levido for any upset caused, we do not apologise for posting it however because it was one side of a debate that needs to be had. We would prefer if our ramblings were kept out of court and do not intend to waste student money pursuing legal outcomes.

  24. Neilson says:

    Jackson.

    The law of defamation, which I assume he was threatening the use of, protects honestly held opinion. Salient has always been an agitator and should not shy away from saying what it thinks in this world of increasing self censorship.

    Regards
    Alexander

  25. I agree with my Learned Friend JJ Neilson on this issue. This appeal should be dismissed. costs are ordered against the Plaintiff.

  26. Norman Levido says:

    Ok guys,lets put this all to rest. I did indeed ring Salient with the threat of legal action in a fit of furious and slightly manic upset anger bought on by reading the outrageous attack on me in Jacksons blog,being a silly old technophbe who owns a clatterty Brother typewriter rather than a computer,I assumed that the blog was in fact printed in your fine rag Salient which I still read from time to time with interest,being a mature student of life {hope I dont get expelled} I woldnt have considered legal action I cant afford it and Im not really the type,believe it or nay,and indeed would fight to the last to help preaserve the inalienable write for anyone to express OPINIONS about anything and everything in a blog or printed forum,.I was hoping Mr Woods apology was perhaps more motivated by a sincere rereading of my answer to him. Anyway he bought me a beer at the Syn bar the other day and we chatted and that was good. Thank you Jackson,I enjoyed your company. Mediation has taken place between Mr Gibson and co and myself and a mediator. Due to the conditions of the agreement I can not really say anything,due to legal requirements (and I gave my word as a gentleman)that nothing outside that forum can be discussed except both parties where pleased with the out come. Andrew regrets the impression given that I presented a bottle to a bouncer on St Patricks day evening,and specifically what was made clear was that NO money had changed hands. Laura is correct,one should not make assumptions about one that one hasnt met. Andrew presented a bottle to me at the Establishment the other night and it was full of Jamiesons Whisky. We talked,we laughed,we didnt mention the war;and yes my impression of the Man is that he is helpful humble and popular,either that or he deserves an oscar.There is nothing quite like a drink a smile and a handshake. He has his business to attend to and I have mine,from here it all looks goods,and a Golden Oldies evening will be held at the big Kumara where I will shamelessly premiere a CD I made seven years ago with some members of the Phoenix Foundation {sound mixing with younger people that was} on a sound system that Mr Gibson has strongly invested in to facilitate the enjoyment of all who are welcome in that establisment;close up may be there to film this wonderful turn of genuine PR,and for this gesture I and many older people will be very grateful. Thank you Mr Gibson,I presume the friendly bouncer will not exclude young students who wish to attend. 7pm Wednesday april 9th at the Big Kumara,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,and all is well. with Aroha Norman Levido esq,

Recent posts

  1. An (im)possible dream: Living Wage for Vic Books
  2. Salient and VUW tussle over Official Information Act requests
  3. One Ocean
  4. Orphanage voluntourism a harmful exercise
  5. Interview with Grayson Gilmour
  6. Political Round Up
  7. A Town Like Alice — Nevil Shute
  8. Presidential Address
  9. Do You Ever Feel Like a Plastic Bag?
  10. Sport
1

Editor's Pick

In Which a Boy Leaves

: - SPONSORED - I’ve always been a fairly lucky kid. I essentially lucked out at birth, being born white, male, heterosexual, to a well off family. My life was never going to be particularly hard. And so my tale begins, with another stroke of sheer luck. After my girlfriend sugge