Hoteliers move to ban tattoo'd patrons

[AC]

What a load of BS... *I shake my head*

I dont see how either having or not having a tattoo makes you a good or bad person.

Vote now! - in link

http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/new...-1226274718106

THE backlash against tattoos has spread to restaurants and pubs, which are banning patrons with visible ink.

From Rouse Hill in Sydney's northwest to wealthy Double Bay in the east, signs are being erected warning patrons they will not be allowed in unless they cover up.The "no tattoo" policies followed NSW Police looking to ban tattoos from the force.

While some pubs and restaurants have formal bans on tattoos, many others have informal policies.

Andrew Stanway, owner of dining spot and watering hole Mrs Sippy in Double Bay, made no apologies for the sign on his door: "All body art is to be covered and not visible to the naked eye."

Mr Stanway said the policy was to keep out "riff-raff".

"With some tattoos, people can be of a lesser persuasion, if you like," Mr Stanway said.

"We don't want the riff-raff, we don't want the crap. I've watched too many places get ruined because of that. I've worked too hard for that."

Mr Stanway said he had no problem with small, discreet tattoos and did not mind if his policy discouraged young people from dining there.

"If you want to come in, you've got to be respectful to my business by being respectfully dressed," he said.

A sign at the Australian Hotel and Brewery in Rouse Hill reads: "NO Visable (sic) Tattoo's (sic)."

The two-year-old pub only enforces the policy on Thursday, Friday and Saturday nights and also bans "gangs or gang clothing".

Matt Morris, a 26-year-old spray painter from Windsor, was rejected at Christmas over his three-quarter "sleeve" of tattoos on his left arm.

"They wouldn't let me in the door. But then we came here for my friend's party (on another occasion) and I put a long-sleeved shirt on and there were staff and other people here with tattoos. I asked the bloke (on the door) about the tattoo policy and they said it just depends on if they don't like the look of you. So I just rolled up my sleeves," he said.

General manager Marcello Colosimo said the tattoo ban applied to the hotel's staff as well as patrons.

"We have a dress policy that comes into effect after 9pm on Thursday, Friday, Saturday nights which includes: no hats, no thongs, no shorts, no offensive or highly visible tattoos, no singlets. This applies to staff as well," he said. "At all other times, these are all welcome."

Coogee Bay Hotel last year had a sign on the doors saying: "Entry is not permitted to anyone when wearing visible tattoos." But the sign has since been removed and when contacted by The Sunday Telegraph, a spokeswoman denied there was a no-tattoo policy.

Australian Hotels Association chief executive Paul Nicolaou said licensees were within their rights to deny entry to anyone as long as they do not breach anti-discrimination laws.

[nstg8a]

lol, id have to wear a glove ala jacko to eat there...

really i dont care, its their business, they can serve who they want.

whilest i believe there shouldnt be 'discrimination' against people with tattoos, when you get a tattoo, especially a visible one, you would have to be a moron to expect no issues to ever arise because of it. right or wrong, some people perceive tattoos as associated with the undesirable elements of society.

so my original point stands, their business, their rules.

[flappist]

Get your revenge by not eating there, or better still open your own restruant that bans people without tattoos.

This discrimination is just so terrible, it is just like people being prejudged by what badges they have on their car like:

Originally Posted by AC

Added 50kWs, just like the Chev badge on the front

[FG_Frodza]

Voted yes.

[gtxb67]

i can see why the owner has thought this way

however
a tattoo does not make you a good or bad person - in the 21st century (even late 20th century), full arm tatts are almost trendy and certainly not just for the riff raff as many perceive tattooed people to be


the other point that he may have forgotten, is the person he is trying to keep out is likely to just knock his bouncer out or come back after hours and do something then. a tattooed person is not a boof head - a boof head may be tattooed and this rule will maybe just anger the boof head enough to do something about it

Originally Posted by nstg8a

lol, id have to wear a glove ala jacko to eat there...

really i dont care, its their business, they can serve who they want.

whilest i believe there shouldnt be 'discrimination' against people with tattoos, when you get a tattoo, especially a visible one, you would have to be a moron to expect no issues to ever arise because of it. right or wrong, some people perceive tattoos as associated with the undesirable elements of society.

so my original point stands, their business, their rules.

i like this reply - no crying "poor lil ol me". i don't have tatts, but if someone did not want to serve me for anything, i would just walk away too

[HVAC PRO]

[kawalsky19]

The brewery in Rouse Hill only seems to enforce that rule for male patrons and i have seen it being enforced selectively ie a group of guys walk in covered in tattoo's, next group walks up to the door and gets rejected due to having a couple of small visible tattoo's. if they are going to enforce a rule like this it should cover everyone not just those who they chose.

[pottery beige]

Originally Posted by FG_Frodza

Voted yes.

you would...

[Jim Goose]

I woulda thought that most restaurants/ hotels already have a "dress code"...
cant see an issue with visible tatts... so lord knows why they see it as a problem?

I can understand rudeness (ie talking on phone while being served etc)... but this is really bizzare.

A drunken yobbo with long sleeves is still going to act the same way if he decides to get agro.

[pottery beige]

personally since having tattoos.. im much tougher.. ive had the sudden urge to hold up a bank.. bash old people and slap crying children...

[nstg8a]

Originally Posted by kawalsky19

The brewery in Rouse Hill only seems to enforce that rule for male patrons and i have seen it being enforced selectively ie a group of guys walk in covered in tattoo's, next group walks up to the door and gets rejected due to having a couple of small visible tattoo's. if they are going to enforce a rule like this it should cover everyone not just those who they chose.

thats life though, its no different to the bouncer that tells you the nightclub is too full so you have to wait, but then turns and lets in a bunch of good looking girls.

i think in society we care too much about trivial issues, and not enough about the serious stuff.

[Neale]

Originally Posted by nstg8a

thats life though, its no different to the bouncer that tells you the nightclub is too full so you have to wait, but then turns and lets in a bunch of good looking girls.

i think in society we care too much about trivial issues, and not enough about the serious stuff.

^^^^^^
totally agree,

[FGII-XR6]

I see the point, not everyone with a tattoo is a bogan or tough nut but these type of people are virtually all tattooed. I don't see the policy working well as more good people would be excluded than morons.

I really don't care if others have tattoos (I don't as I see it as nothing more than a self inflicted scar but to each their own) but seriously, some people don't think before the act. Anyone wanting their face done should have a mandatory psych assessment given the permanent nature of a tattoo.

The owner of any establishment is entitled to enforce standards providing they don't breach the anti discrimination act, if you don't like it cover up or go elsewhere

[Franco Cozzo]

Isn't that descrimination?

It would be a different story and everyone would be up in arms if they said they didn't allow gays into their business because of X reason.

[glavas]

Originally Posted by Big Damo

Isn't that descrimination?

It would be a different story and everyone would be up in arms if they said they didn't allow gays into their business because of X reason.

everyone? thats rather broad is it not?

[nstg8a]

Something are legal to discriminate against. some aren't.

personally if someone doesn't want the business of certain people that should be their choice imo

[FGII-XR6]

No, the anti discrimination act only covers race, religion, marital status, sexuality & disability anything else is up to the individual to decide

Originally Posted by Big Damo

Isn't that descrimination?

It would be a different story and everyone would be up in arms if they said they didn't allow gays into their business because of X reason.

[SSD-85]

This thread just reminds me of a certain quote from Futurama...

[z80]

It's a bit over the top to ban all tattoos.

But they run the businesses, after a while they work out the statistics of where the problems start from.

If they have a run of problems with tattoo'ed people then they can fix the problem anyway they like.


It could be as simple as looking at video security events and if all the problems involve patrons with tattoos or baseball hats they ban baseball hatted tattoo'ed Collingwood supporters.

[Iggypoppin']

Cover. I am judging this book by it.

[My poor XF]

Originally Posted by pottery beige

personally since having tattoos.. im much tougher.. ive had the sudden urge to slap crying children...

I don't have tats and I get that urge all the time.

Don't care if you have tats, people are knobs without them so......

[DJR-351]

I gotta laugh at the 1 Comment left tho....

Matt D of Australiana Posted at 1:19 AM Today
Years ago I would have agreed. You used to have to be tough to have tatts. Now nerds and girly men get them to match their mascara. Let the little princesses in to have their Crownies or whatever "special boutique" cocktail they prance around with these days. Tatts? hell I think I even saw a Nun with one.

[ratter]

Nothing really new happening here, I worked security back in the mid 90's, at 1 venue, I was not allow entry to anybody with visible tatts.

[ego gtp]

Well there a quite a few morons around. How about people with or without glasses, beards ,shaved heads ,or Even bloody older people, what a load of bull. So let me see if I have this right . Here goes. You walk in to this establishment and you are gay either male or female, you have visible tattoos and your refused entry because of it you could complain you were discriminated against but if you are not gay ,you couldn't use that . Before people get on their soap box think about it it would happen . Yes I am a very tattooed male ,would not go to this place with their policies. The whole worlds gone mad...................

[FGII-XR6]

Originally Posted by ego gtp

Well there a quite a few morons around. How about people with or without glasses, beards ,shaved heads ,or Even bloody older people, what a load of bull. So let me see if I have this right . Here goes. You walk in to this establishment and you are gay either male or female, you have visible tattoos and your refused entry because of it you could complain you were discriminated against but if you are not gay ,you couldn't use that . Before people get on their soap box think about it it would happen . Yes I am a very tattooed male ,would not go to this place with their policies. The whole worlds gone mad...................

if they clearly state they can't get in becauce of tattoos and there is a policy in place about tattoos nobody would have legal grounds to sue if they had visible tattoos

[Yellow_Festiva]

Originally Posted by ratter

Nothing really new happening here, I worked security back in the mid 90's, at 1 venue, I was not allow entry to anybody with visible tatts.

Fine line isn't it..... A friend who used to manage a club in the Cross had similar stories. Ban and you were up for trouble, let em in and you were up for trouble.

In Russia, they are more direct... they didn't like the look of you they told you direct. Heard them being referred to as the "Face Police"...

Much the same in a lot of other places... "Rights of admission" signs hang all over African hotels / restaurants / bars / clubs.

Shame they are targeting tattoos.... Most of my brothers tradie mates have tats galore and they are the nicest motley crew you can meet, besides their outward appearance!

[Rodp]

Good evening.. I had a reservation for two..?



Does it include tramp stamps?

[tex]

There would seem to be just as many people with Tattoos than without, infact, in the more 'hip' regional areas (Chapel St springs to mind, seems to be an essential beautiful people accessory), the Tatt-less person is probably in the minority..

If that business at the heart of this story wants to reduce their potential market by such a large percentage, by applying the policy across the board, that's their perogative I suppose.

It won't be applied across the board. The gorgeous model chick in a black dress that turns up with a tattoo on her upper arm, or ankle, something discreet, won't be told to bugger off.

The dirty looking bloke with HATE and LOVE on his fingers, a spider web on his neck a tear drop under his left eye with full 'painted sleeves' visible for all to see - probably will be asked to keep walking.

The dirty looking bloke covered in jail house tough badges, whats his take??? He'd probably be a bit ****ed I reckon.

Have I got a problem with that? Nah not really, couldn't give a crap, but only for purely selfish reasons.... I like to look at hot model chicks with a little tatt while I eat and drink, and not so much dirty looking rough heads covered in jail house ink



That's life and to be frank, it aint news worthy in my opinion.

Nor is dress code policy, or minimum age requirements, or height, etc etc etc.

[AC]

One thing also sprang to mind while I've been away from this this afternoon.

Sure they can enforce their own criteria for entry, But bare in mind that people who have spent the money on it, generally have more money to burn. So being a free country and all, feel free to turn away the business of the 99.9% of people who are good people and the money they are willing to spend at your business. Your loss, I know where I prefer to spend mine.

[svo supporter]

Personally I couldn't give a rats if someone had tatts or not. They want to spend their hard earned in a place I owned, go for it.

If someone is going to start trouble in a restaurant, or alikes, they'll get the boot, tats or not.