Chefs kiss🤌💅
Zagorath@aussie.zone 7 months ago
Personally, I’m more interested in this from a legal perspective than I am from a moral one. I don’t have a strong opinion one way or the other, morally, but I’m fascinated to see if the case gets up, what other implications it could have.
But also:
The opportunity to extend the performance aspect of Ladies Lounge was embraced by the artist and 25 female supporters, who entered Tuesday’s tribunal hearing wearing a uniform of navy business attire. Throughout the day’s proceedings, they engaged in discreet synchronised choreographed movements, including leg crossing, leaning forward together and peering over the top of their spectacles. Apart from the gentle swish of 25 pairs of nylon clad legs crossing in unison, the support party remained silent. When the proceedings concluded, the troupe exited the tribunal to the Robert Palmer song Simply Irresistible.
Sublime.
useless_modern_god@aussie.zone 7 months ago
zarcher@lemmy.world 7 months ago
Respect for the choreographed movements during the tribunal.
pelespirit@sh.itjust.works 7 months ago
Do you not have men’s clubs in Australia like Masons, Elks, Eagles, Moose, etc.?
Nath@aussie.zone 7 months ago
We have clubs that are open to men only, as well as clubs open to women only.
I’m not sure whether this person is genuinely unaware of this, or whether he’s making a lot of noise explicitly to draw attention to the art exhibit as some form of marketing. Neither would surprise me.
zero_gravitas@aussie.zone 7 months ago
I think the men-only clubs have either been granted special exemptions, or pre-date legislation and are grandfathered-in.
Nonameuser678@aussie.zone 7 months ago
Amazing public relations campaign if this is all part of a marketing thing.
abhibeckert@lemmy.world 7 months ago
The legal aspect is crystal clear. I bet the court will be angry that it even went to court at all.
The purpose of a judge is to settle disagreements. When both sides of a court case agree with the facts, then there is nothing to judge and it should not go to court at all. It should be settled out of court.
Good chance the defence will be forced to pay legal fees for both sides of the case - on top of damages.
MetaSynapse@kbin.social 7 months ago
Sounds like someone didn't read the full article:
PoliticalAgitator@lemmy.world 7 months ago
His opinions are too important for things like “reading articles”.
Neato@ttrpg.network 7 months ago
You clearly didn’t read the article. A very typical, privileged response.
Although, you are experiencing the Ladies Lounge in the way it was intended.
SamuraiBeandog@lemmy.world 7 months ago
Are you a legal expert? Is the fact that this is “art” not a more complex legal issue?
Makhno@lemmy.world 7 months ago
I’d say no. It’s a business, and it discriminates based on gender. Seems pretty black and white.
If they weren’t an actual business and didn’t make profits, then that would make more sense from an “it’s art” defense
dustyData@lemmy.world 7 months ago
Art is entitled to profit. Museums, cinema, theater, music concerts, all of those are art and are business. They aren’t mutually exclusive categories.
Lmaydev@programming.dev 7 months ago
Yeah imagine movies or theatre shows costing money to see. Crazyness.
DontMakeMoreBabies@kbin.earth 7 months ago
Plus this sort of bullshit clogs up dockets and takes time away from cases that actually need judicial intervention.
Zagorath@aussie.zone 7 months ago
Pretty sure you don’t get paid time off work for a civil case you chose to bring.
Unless you mean using annual leave, in which case your boss can’t get fucked, it’s none of their business what you use it for.