Louisville makes national news again, but not in a good way

[Robin Garr]

Ignoring the "dispicable"(ness) of discrimination (in general) for the moment and focusing just on the -reality- of this (type) of issue...I guaran-damn-tee you that right-wrong or indifferent introducing a strong young-urban-black presence into places like 4SL will keep white suburbanites away. I've seen it happen.

Probably true, because racial bigotry, sadly, runs deep in US history and culture, going all the way back to slavery in colonial times. And some politicians continue playing the race card with "dog whistles," as we saw on the losing side last month.

But can the pursuit of profit justify breaking the law? We're kind of repeating what's already been said in this thread: "... we're labeling 100 percent of the population based on the actions of a few. Just as important, it does not justify breaking civil rights and anti-discrimination law. Too many people fought too hard, and some gave their lives, in that fight for us to ignore it lightly with a wink and a nudge."

Well we don't really know all the details of what actually happened from the article. It's hard to say if the place was justified in refusing the business or if they even actually did so. Assuming it actually happened and the guy trying to schedule the party was clean cut and dressed well, which is a requirement for anyone hanging out at makers, then totally unjustified.

But personally I've never known any black person that had trouble at 4th street. They just don't want to attract that segment that Steve was talking about that is looking for trouble and there are ways to do it which I don't even think they try to hide to be honest. That is honestly justifiable IMO. What are your options, lose your business just to be fair to everyone?

they fear a clientele perceived as "African-American" would keep white suburbanites away, setting up an economic disaster for them.

Ignoring the "dispicable"(ness) of discrimination (in general) for the moment and focusing just on the -reality- of this (type) of issue...I guaran-damn-tee you that right-wrong or indifferent introducing a strong young-urban-black presence into places like 4SL will keep white suburbanites away. I've seen it happen.

When the Mall of America (Taj-ma-Mall) in Bloomington (MN) first opened, the entire 4th floor was devoted to entertainment...Movie theaters, a comedy club (two actually), Hard Rock Cafe, Hooters, Planet Hollywood and several other bars (of the type you see on 4SL). It was a vibrant albeit very "white" scene...Segue a few years later, the state put in a "light rail" spur linking downtown with the Mall of America (locally nicknamed "The Somali Trolly"). Immediately the mall began having "gang" issues...severe gang issues. To the point where all of the bars and restaurants eventually closed. It has made something of a comeback in recent years as a result of a "zero tolerance - we ain't kidding around" policy on the part of the Bloomington police but still remains a shadow of what it once was. In addition, for a number of years retail traffic took a -helluva- dip just because of the harassment of customers by large groups of roving young-urban-blacks...and I know this because both of my daughters worked at the Monster Mall at the time.

There's a big difference between restricting gangs, enforcing a dress and behavior code, and restricting blacks. If in fact, the employee asked how many blacks vs. whites, that's clearly discrimination and totally unacceptable.
Deb

The thing that tells me this was wrong was that the gentlemen attempted to make a reservation...

That tells me, automatically, they have consideration- book it.

We have a great Black Community here. Seriously, we are blessed as a city because of our attitude towards this subject.

I grew up here and my mother never taught me racism. Indeed, her parental approach has enriched my life tremendously...

[Robin Garr]

A Facebook friend queried the Maker's Mark distillery management and got the following response, which personally I find impressive.

Maker’s Mark licenses its name and trademark to a third party appointed by Cordish Operating Ventures, LLC, which is solely responsible for the ownership, operation and management of the Maker’s Mark Bourbon House and Lounge in Louisville Kentucky. Maker’s Mark has no ownership or involvement in the Lounge whatsoever. Maker’s Mark was unaware of the complaint filed by Andre Mulligan against the Lounge until it was covered in the media and, contrary to a published report, no one from Maker’s Mark has had any dealings with Mr. Mulligan.

“The allegations in the complaint are extremely serious and, if true, reflect behavior that is abhorrent and unacceptable, as well as absolutely contrary to the core brand values of Maker’s Mark. Maker’s Mark does not accept, and will not tolerate, discrimination in any form, and has so notified and warned the company which is solely responsible for the operation of the Lounge. While not involved in the litigation, Maker’s Mark will continue to monitor the situation closely and will take all actions it feels necessary under the circumstances.”

A Facebook friend queried the Maker's Mark distillery management and got the following response, which personally I find impressive.

Point of clarification...I'm the FB friend in question, and I received this email because I'm a MM Ambassador (as I'm sure many Forumites are). The Samuels are doing their best to stay out in front of this, which I applaud. I'd venture most of their Ambassadors hadn't even heard about this lawsuit until they saw this email.

I'm amazed that nobody from whatever group operates this restaurant isn't out there making some kind of statement on this. None of the articles I read mentioned anything about the management, or even that anyone tried to contact the management. The Cordish statements I've seen imply that it's not them, but a third party. My gut reaction to the AlterNet article was to doubt that whatever occurred actually went down like the article describes. On the other hand, the fact that the management team isn't all over the news denying it makes me wonder as well.

Maker's Mark announced this morning that they are looking into taking away the Lounge's licensing.
Deb

[Robin Garr]

On the other hand, the fact that the management team isn't all over the news denying it makes me wonder as well.

Richard, their lawyers are probably directing them to keep it on the down-low because of pending litigation. That's standard advice.

That said, as has been discussed in this thread, it's an open secret that Cordish sees it as a critical business matter to keep Disney On Fourth perceived as "white." It's ugly, it reflects an ugly reality, and they've had to balance ethics against profit to do it. But there's been abundant news coverage since Day One regarding their heavy use of moonlighting police and various forms of racial profiling, including an anti-hip hop dress code, to make it happen. It's no secret that they've calculatedly and consistently done what it takes to keep their scene, ummm, "suburbanite-friendly," and it's coming back to bite them. I just don't see any surprises here.

I wholeheartedly agree with you, and having spent time in the restaurant industry I know people have ways of asking these types of questions without really asking them. Do I believe the businesses down there are trying to create a "suburbanite-friendly atmosphere?" (wink wink). Yes, I do. Do I believe someone asked "What will be the ratio of black people to white people?" Not so much. They're have to be a complete moron to ask it in such a way, and it bothers me a bit that the AlterNet article states this as a fact without a mention of trying to call the restaurant for a comment. That's what's making me reserve judgment on this until the whole story comes out.

[Robin Garr]

That's what's making me reserve judgment on this until the whole story comes out.

Fair enough. I can easily construct a scenario where a boss's wink and nudge gets translated into something more explicit at a lower level. "Who will rid me of this troublesome priest" didn't work out well for Thomas a Becket. But of course I'm just speculating ...

Looks like the work of a professional plaintiff looking for a payday.

[Robin Garr]

Looks like the work of a professional plaintiff looking for a payday[/url].

You can discern that from the CJ's rehash?

Looks like the work of a professional plaintiff looking for a payday[/url].

You can discern that from the CJ's rehash?

Well, considering that this is, at least, his third lawsuit against private restaurants.... then yeah.

People were certainly quick to judge this restaurant based on previous occurrences at FSL, so I think it's only fair that Mr. Mulligan be subject to similar scrutiny. Certainly, this is shaping up to be somewhat different than what came out originally. I noticed that the AlterNet story has been revised since it was first published. Of all the stories I read about this, the CJ's was the most thorough, although they were a few days late to the party.

The sad thing is that Maker's Mark (and the people who work for the brand) will likely suffer as a result of the completely irresponsible way this was reported. In addition, if Mr. Mulligan is shown to be a serial complainer, others who may suffer legitimate discrimination will likely not be taken as seriously.