Adult store "Sh!" Discriminates against

[Highlander]

Hi All,
last month I went and visited the annual "Erotica" at Olympia and part of my visit was Soho and other adult stores in London, I came across a shop called "Sh!" which I recognise on TV since its promote a friendly environment which encourages women to shop there, however I was told that I was NOT allowed in because a) I am a man and b)as a man I need to be accompanied with a woman to be allowed in. I was furious and I am pretty sure its violated the Sex Discrimination Act and also broke Trading License agreements on terms and condition, though I am surprise they were granted a license at all. I wrote to the EOC (which I stress are often more sympathetic to discrimination against women and only pays lips service in representing male interests) and they agree that "Sh!" policy is illegal and discriminatory in providing a service that should cater for all genders, but they say that I should take the case to the County Court on my own tod. All very well, if I was unemployed or very low income and have the time off work to do it I would take "Sh!" to court, but I dont have the benefit to do itand if I lose the case I end up footing the bill.
I have emailed Trading Standard about it and am awaiting their reply, though I am sure the Council could act on complaints from members of the public. If I was living in London I could lobby my MP or my local council over this matter but since I lived up north it makes it that much difficult. If anyone living in London or know how to take a complaint further than I could here is the address of the adult store.

Sh!, 39 Coronet Street, London, N1 6HD
website; http://www.sh-womenstore.com/shwebsiteindex/shmenu.htm

In this day and age its particularly offensive that a store trading for the general public would openly discriminate against men when no other stores, even adult stores object to women being allowed into its premises.
I am sure there would be an outcry if a store has a policy of not allowing women in unless accompanied with a man. Speaking of PG or 12A films were children can only be allowed in to cinema with their parent(s) its appears "Sh!" treats men like "misguided children" and see women as "responsible parents".
Outraged!

[Highlander]

Correction to the heading

[fatguyranting]

I can't see how this is even an issue?

The idea that someones's set up a shop whose motivation is to make women feel comfortable when shopping for smut, should be respected. Look, there's hundreds of shops you can buy stuff, why get stressed by the policy of one in particular?
The idea that you'd devote time to writing a strong letter of complaint about this, is impossible for me to understand. Different storkes, for different folks and all that.

[Frank]

What total utter rubbish.

I have shopped there a number of times, escorted by a girlfriend. Its a lovely shop and if they want to set a rule of men only with girls they should be free to do so.

Just as some mens clubs should be free to exclude women.

You are taking political correctness to an absurd limit.

Calm nown

[mart]

OK, you are arguing about a principle but I agree with the last 2 posts.
Mart

[buttsie]

1 store thats user friendly towards women
(No single desperate males dressed in complimentary trenchcoats)

Umpteen other stores for men

Just as there are still Men Only Clubs...I don't see the problem apart from the inconvenience to any single males who want to have a look...maybe take along a female blow up doll...fits the criteria i believe

cheers
B...OZ

[Highlander]

Yes there men only clubs but these are private members club. A shop trading for the public is for everyone and it is an offence to impose restriction on a paryicular gender when it is after all a retailer. How would you like it if Dixons refuse you admission if you are a man (or woman), why are anyone making a special case for adult shops when it should be seen like any other stores in the highstreet? I am not familiar with stores not allowing women in unless with a man so why the need for discrimination? Also if you are gay why would this store still refuse admission to gay male couples but do not impose similar restriction to heterosexual couples?
I suggest those who object to my comments need to to understand more about your own rights and those of others before criticising.
I travelled 400 miles to London expecting to visit some of the popular places and one do not expect to be treated like second class citizen from a shop that clearly discriminate on the ground of gender.

[Highlander]

Frank, why do you need to be escorted to do any shopping? I may be your thing and I dont meant to intrude, but I remember the last time I have to be escorted into anywhere was when I was under 12 and I need to go with an adult to see a PG film at the cinema. Why would "Sh!" be treating me like an irresponsible minor that need accompanied with a woman?
Let say if you want to buy your wife/girlfriens a gift do you need to take her along to get permission to do so? If it was me I like to make that decision myself what to buy her, I am an adult with responsibilties and I do have the right to buy and shop anywhere as I please without needing a woman to be allow to do that.
Think again mates.

[Officer Dibble]

Yes, it's fine by me if the proprietors of 'Sh' want to make it a girl?s only shop - It's their business and their choice. However, what Highlander is rightly highlighting and ranting on about is that if we were to similarly set up a set up a 'geezers only shop? we would have every Guardian reading, public sector, hand wringing, pocy lower middle-class twat and 'wimmin's group' in the UK baying for our blood and what's more being taken seriously by a middle-class government and mainstream media.

Highlander?s sex discrimination complaint, although self evidently valid, is not being taken seriously because the fuckers who you have to complain to in these instance's are the afor mentioned public sector loving, hand wringing middle-class twats who dominate government and the media. This is an instance that shows up their philosophy for what it is - bullshit. They're not really interested in equal rights for all, they're just interested in maintaining there warped politically correct belief systems where 'wimmin' have been so oppressed in the past that they need 'positive discrimination' which means putting them in jobs that they are not up to or suited to, whether they or anyone else likes it or not. And though it is not part of the law it also means vigorously pursuing 'wimmin's' complaints while sweeping the complaints and objections of men under the carpet - as in Highlander?s case.

You stick with it Highlander me old son. It's good to see one man with a bit of spirit left. Your knockers in this thread have either missed the point or got no backbone to take on middle-class ponces and they're warped ideology.

Officer Dibble.

[joe king]

what about excluding only black women?