23 October 2007

This Chicken Bocker Wears Excessive Jewelry and T-Shirts

Thank you, thank you, thank you for all the great discussion on yesterday's post about the dress code at The Wine Loft. I very much appreciated that you didn't all agree and that you seemed to say what you really felt.

Veggie Mama summed up my opinion nicely with this comment,

It just seems really excessive, like they're going out of their way to be snobby. I like the idea of a nice place you can go and not feel out of place by being a little dressed up. If the sign simply said, "Business Casual dress code strictly enforced," I wouldn't think twice. But listing all of the specifics (like we're too stupid to figure out business attire) just makes you feel like a child. NOT the kind of place I'd want to frequent.

Precisely.

I fully appreciate that a business wishes to cater to a specific clientele. McDonald's caters to kids, certain restaurants require gentlemen to wear a jacket, biker bars are typically filled with bikers. Having a dress code is not in an of itself a problem, it's how The Wine Loft has chosen to be very specific in it's exclusions that I have a issues with.

Having stated at the bottom of their list of rules that "business casual or business attire is suggested" seems sufficient enough of a guideline. Why do they feel the need to include such specific exclusions? This is a chain restaurant with more than one location. Mobile's location has only been open for several months and this sign was on the door before it ever even opened. Therefore, it appears that this was a proactive list of rules rather than a reactive list of rules.

Their rules are incredibly subjective and most likely very difficult to enforce. What exactly defines "excessive jewelry" or "baggy clothing?" If a woman with excessive jewelry and her boyfriend wearing a hat and baggy shorts enters the restaurant to be seated, does the maitre'd ask them to wait just a moment, only to return with a manager who has the job of asking these people to leave? Do they allow them to be seated, only to have the other patrons stare at these hooligans who are clearly not following the posted dress code?

Several comments were made in regards to whether these rules were targeting African Americans. Anonymous asked this question,

I'm troubled, is it the "no excessive jewelry" rule that is making some of you view the sign as "racist" or excluding blacks?

My reason for asking is because it seems racist to me to automatically jump to the conclusion that only black people wear excessive jewelry and baggy clothing so the sign was therefore aimed at black people.

Every race is guilty of breaking those restrictions and not EVERYTHING is about race. My other question is that if you saw this same sign in lets say New York (being more culturally diverse than the deep South) would you still think they were trying to restrict blacks?

It doesn't seem too unreasonable to me although I'm not into upscale places. My third question is that they typically expect the same dress code at church so does that mean churches are trying to exclude black people as well?

When you work at a business with a similar dress code does that mean the business is trying to avoid hiring black people? I could go on all day here but I just thought some of those comments accusing the sign of "racism" were actually very subtle form of racism in itself. Think about it.

This was a good point, yet just because this dress code is the same for church or work, there's just something that feels very exclusionary about their rules. Being that this is a culturally diverse city, perhaps I do feel this way because this is the Deep South. I see, hear, and feel racism more here than I have anywhere else I've ever lived, so this may be why I wondered if this sign was directed at African Americans. The question of whether this thought is a "very subtle form of racism in itself" is a valid one. Maybe it is, but I really don't think that those who pointed it out meant their statements to appear racist.

I feel very strongly that they are losing potential customers with a sign such as this. Although I could easily put together an outfit that would pass their very critical standards, I would not consider visiting this establishment simply because of their rules. If they had a sign that merely stated their business casual suggestion, I would actually be interested in checking this place out on a rare evening out with Tate.

So there you have it! My opinion! Your life is now complete, you can sleep better knowing this vital information.

*******

If I had the guts, and I do not, I would call them myself and ask them the reason behind this specific dress code. If anybody out there would like to do so, feel free and let me know what you find out. I'm way to chicken to do it myself.

17 People are even more brilliant:

Unknown said...

I'm betting that even if you did call their response would not be sufficient. Since they are a private establishment they have the right to enforce just about any rule they want in any way that they want. "We reserve the right to refuse service to anyone."

Good call by anonymous about conclusions jumped to regarding race!

Anonymous said...

Yeah, that's a place I wouldn't visit either. They are obviously targeting some perceived potential clientele and saying, "Stay Out!"

And that's very sad that you see racism on such a level that you do.

Jane, Pinks & Blues

EE said...

I missed the last post...am going to go get caught up!

LunaNik said...

Yikes!! This sign seems to me to be turning away a very large group of people. Speaking from the perspective of someone living in the Northeast, not only would I associate the restaurants unwanted attire with what young people of all color wear, I would also associate it with sterotypical Italian and Jewish women from Staten Island, North Jersey, and Brooklyn (lots of jewelery, baggy velour sweatsuits, and designer sneakers). If this restaurant was near me, I bet they'd add big hair to the list...LOL. It just seems a little strange to me that an establishment would try so hard to attract a very specific group of people, that it would gladly insult the "undesirables" by posting such a detailed list no-no's. I don't get it. If you want customers to look nice, by all means enforce a dress code. But, such a long list of unwanted items is not necessary and almost seems degrading. Looks to me, this place is a bit too snobby. Me, my hoop earrings and frayed jeans, nor my hubby in his hat and sneakers, wouldn't be caught dead in this place.

AndreAnna said...

This really was a great discussion! I loved reading all the comments..

Anonymous said...

I really have nothing to add besides the fact that I found the sign wacky and unlike anything I've ever seen. Usually "Dress Code in Effect" is enough of an explanation without them having to list all of the odd specifics.

Annie said...

I think the sign is nuts, and agree that 'Business Attire is Suggested', would have been sufficient.

However, I read this as the establishment making a judgement about people considering dining here, and their ability to appropriately consider what 'Business Attire' is. This has nothing to do with race in my view, but an attempt to keep out certain socioeconomic groups? The first thing that sprang to my mind when I read that list of rules was 'they're trying to keep the hardcore rednecks out'.

Anonymous said...

I really felt that a sign like this is ok. I mean, when you go to a club (even in my hood) there are a LOT of regulations on what you can and cannot wear. Tennis shoes, white t-shirts, and sandles are normally excluded. This is really no different in my opinion. I dont think its a race thing, rather its this establishment that just wants to seem "classy" in a world where no one takes any time to actually look presentable to go out on a Saturday night. I myself am guilty of this. But if I know that I want to go to this certain place and I have to dress up to do so, then by all means I will.

Heather said...

I tried to call them.

Shocking, I know!

The mail box for the corp. office is full.

WTF?

Um, ok.

I only want to go to this place to break their rules. Because you know I get orgasmic pleasure from rule breaking!

BOSSY said...

Working at home, Bossy doesn't have a Dress Code as much as she enlists a Mess Code.

Anonymous said...

The sign went up before they opened? That's strange! A permit request to sell booze? I get that. A sign saying just who qualifies to drink said booze? I don't get.

Anonymous said...

I have been to the Wine Loft in Birmingham. It was nice, kind of stuffy. I didn't even remember that is what the place was called until I looked at the website. I don't remember seeing any signs on the door, but that is not guarantee that there weren't any.

Stacy

Mandie said...

Wow, if I'd have known my comment would be featured, I would have tried harder to put forth that smart & eloquent facade I attempt to maintain in my blog. :)

Anonymous said...

The idea that being sensitive to the possibility of subtly-disguised racism is now IN ITSELF racist makes me feel weary of this life.

Anonymous said...

I don't see the sign as being racist at all since I see all races and socioeconomical classes wear some degree of what is listed on that sign.

I don't know what the reason is for this particular establishment to enforce such a dress code. I own a bar/resturant with my hubby and we had to start enforcing a dress code because we had gang issues develop. Our bar is in a college town. There were a couple of gangs that were hanging out in our bar. The color of the hats and clothing represented what gang they belonged in. Not only was there some theft from gang members but several fights and a decline in business because other patrons were afraid of the fights and animosity between gangs. We were also sued a few times by patrons that were injured during scuffles. We had to enforce a dress code to save our business. It was a very scary time. The dress code has been in effect for 2 years and we do not have any complaints. Gang members probably still come in but fighting has decreased since it's not so easy to identify who is a gang member and from what gang.

Anonymous said...

I don't have much to add except to say that the assumption of the south lacking diversity is factually inaccurate, particularly the comparison to New York. Mississippi has a 60/40 split meaning 60% white with 40% minorities (most of which is black with maybe 10% Hispanic or Asian) and Alabama has a 70/30 makeup. New York is 75/25 again with the 75% representing white people and the remaining 25% being black, Hispanic or Asian.

The south is a lot of things to a lot of people but it is definitely not lacking diversity.

Bon said...

i missed this, but just wanted to say that i think the sign definitely does target particular aesthetics, the majority of which are associated with so-called "ethnic" identity, as well as with working class membership and youth culture. so they're definitely being exclusive, though perhaps more classist than formally racist. but in clearly and blatantly trying to exclude the "ghetto" look...are they being racist? that, of course, is the 64 million dollar question.

i found it really really funny that in their snotty little list they apparently forgot to pluralize "tshirt"...for having such high standards of dress, they rather fall down on their grammar.