Nanny of the Month for June 2010: Ladies' Night Foe James Kirkpatrick!

Busybodies in Illinois are itching to bag baggy pants, and—Holy handcuffs, Batman!—in Los Angeles they're throwing the Caped Crusader behind bars!

But there can be only one Nanny of the Month, and this time it's the state bureaucrat who's thumbing his nose at the great Kool & the Gang anthem by cracking down on bars and restaurants that offer ladies' night (it discriminates against men, you see).

Presenting Reason.tv's Nanny of the Month for June 2010: Commissioner of the Minnesota Department of Human Rights James Kirkpatrick!

To watch previous Nanny of the Month videos, go here: http://www.youtube.com/user/ReasonTV#p/c/2DD00E99B83A258A

"Nanny of the Month" is written and produced by Ted Balaker. Associate Producer: Alex Manning; Animation: Meredith Bragg.

Approximately one minute.

Go here http://reason.tv/ for downloadable iPod, HD, and audio versions of all our videos and subscribe to Reason.tv's YouTube channel to receive automatic notification when new content is posted.

Category:

News & Politics

Tags:

• reason.com
• reason.tv
• reason.org
• libertarian
• nanny of the month
• nanny state
• ted balaker
• alex manning
• ladies night
• james kirkpatrick
• batman
• saggy pants

[Wormtail81]

Ladies night is definitely designed to BENEFIT MEN.

[bigboss686]

It's jerks like this that give the men's rights movement a bad name.

I think it's a far higher priority that we reform the imbalances between men and women in the legal system and government as opposed to trying to once again boss around private businesses, which should be free to do what they want. In regards to something such as this.

[Shonenut213]

Finally men are standing up to the feminazis hahahahaha

[TravistheHuman]

Nick Gillespie AKA Leather Man.

[marge113]

AUGUST 20, 2011, CAPITAL WEST WING. LEMONAIDE PROTEST.. BRING YOUR LEMONAIDE , CUPS AND ICE. 10CENTS A CUP..

[lakesidelivin]

@SunSunSuperFun In fact, if presented properly in court, this would be found to be non-discriminatory, since ladies night is expressly meant to draw ladies to an establishment for the benefit of men, who want them there for their own appreciation. The men who come because of ladies night accept the conditions as being a benefit to them. Less expansive laws is a worthy goal, but common sense application of existing laws should be enforced by the public in choosing their representatives.

[salsa02]

that's right WOMEN we want our drinks cheap too....

[SunSunSuperFun]

The only way you could be against the anti-ladies night movement is if you're against public accommodation laws generally (or unless you're wholly irrational and believe that laws should not apply to the benefit of males). Even if you dislike public accommodation statutes, why not support this? Don't you people get that rigid application of the law is one of the fastest ways to stop expansive laws from coming into effect/remaining in force? Textual application encourages less expansive laws.

[whiskers123]

@Freethought42

You must be under qualified. :p

[Freethought42]

@whiskers123

Then why won't that hooters across town hire me?

I should be free from gender discrimination.

[whiskers123]

@Freethought42

Freedom of discrimination is based on things like religion, gender and race. Not based on occupation. Know your rights!

[whiskers123]

@slimat420

Your rights protect you from being discriminated based on race, religion, or gender, they do not protect people from discrimination based on occupation. It is not discrimination to give vets and active military free drinks. It would be discrimination to give only blacks free drinks, or only Christians, ect.

Understand your rights, because without them we will have nothing.