So apparently there is this huge douchebag* who wants to get rid of ladies’ nights, because he feels that having to pay full price for drinks when women do not infringes on his civil rights.

Is that so, Mr. Roy Den Hollander (no, seriously, click on that, it’s a fucking doozy)?  In addition to playing for you the TINIEST of violins, let me say that I strangely find myself in the position of agreeing with you on thinking that this is sexist.  Just not for the same reasons as you.

Ladies’ nights, unfortunately, aren’t “one of those perks” that we get as ladies; they are a ploy to get women in spaces to which they do not flock naturally.  Maybe, because those spaces are not safe?  Maybe, because the availability of cheap liquor for women means that they will drink more, and then maybe they will sleep with one of the dudes that populate this space? Huh, I think there is a word for that, when a person is sexually coerced while under the influence of intoxicants…

Look, I like cheap drinks as much as the next person, I really do.  Paying six dollars for a shitty beer just because you live in New York City isn’t that awesome, and it really can seem like I’ve won some sort of prize when I get a drink half off because I perform femininity just so.  But this night is NOT for the ladies, it is for the date-rapists.  I’d pay full price and drink a little less to get rid of that.

*I’ve heard lots of arguments about not using this word as an insult; that it is sexist, because douches are related to female hygiene and they were part of ladies’ contraceptive accoutrements before more effective methods were around.  While I get that, I tend to to disagree with this position.  Douches are BAD BAD BAD for vaginas, should NOT be part of a healthy person’s snatch routine, and thus are a great insult, in my book.  I mean, douches hurt vaginas; douches are terrible.  Moreover, I don’t think that people were calling each other douchebags in the Roosevelt era, but feel free to prove me wrong about that.

Advertisements