A New York lawyer, Roy Den Hollander, is suing several nightclubs to end the practice of Ladies' Night admission and drinks.
"I'm tired of having my rights violated and being treated as a second-class citizen," Hollander told ABC News.
The legality of Ladies' Night is left to the wiser minds of the court system. But one clear question leaps out: "Are you nuts?"
Even the United States Army, not known for subtle wisdom, figured out how to deal with controversial regulations of unfairness. "Don't Ask, Don't Tell."
This is like a 10-year-old finding the mother lode, a stack of his dad's Playboys, and his friend saying, "I'm not sure we're supposed to have these. Let's put them back."
Should it be illegal to hold Ladies' Nights for attracting female-type people into bars? Let's say "Yes," for the sake of argument. The question is - what kind of lunkhead would make that argument?
Right now, other lunkheads are rising in angst, sputtering phrases like "If women want equality, they can't have it both ways." And "What if a bar wanted to discriminate because of skin color?"
Excellent questions, in Lunkhead World.
It's bizarre to read such actual comments on Internet sites, suggesting "If women want equality..." as if there was some uncertainty about the matter, or should be.
This isn't about women demanding free admission to nightclubs. It's about clubs desperately wanting women to come into their establishments. Why? Because men folk seem to really, really like that a lot - and they buy drinks in prayerful hope that this will get women to like them, or at least get women tipsy enough to like them.
If any bars discriminated because of color, they would be hung by their thumbs. But these nightclubs aren't keeping anyone out. They're trying to be inclusive, albeit just once a week.
(Side note: if there was a bar overflowing with hot babes in droves far greater than men, and the owner instituted a free Guys' Night, would Mr. Hollander be equally outraged by the unfairness and sue? Most likely, he would be fighting off the hordes of other men trying to get in.)
But still, what if it really is illegal? Of course, people do illegal things regularly and never blink. Driving one mile over the speed limit is illegal. So is spitting on a sidewalk in many communities. In Evanston, Illinois, it's illegal to have more than four grown dogs in a home. Surprise. None of these are enforced.
Many pointless laws, happily, are overlooked - the issue is harm. Being pissed off because someone who you actually want in a nightclub doesn't have to pay, that doesn't seem to meet that "harm" standard.
(Suing to stop something that most men spend a lifetime praying for, however, does clarify why Roy Hollander feels like a second-class citizen.)
But no, someone may cry, this is about a constitutional issue, the core of our democracy, not just spitting. Unfortunately, even Mr. Hollander can't quite explain his burden. He likes having the fair debutantes in bars. A lot.
As he told ABC News, perhaps men should be charged the same or even less than women. ""Each guy that walks into that club will have more money to buy her a drink," he fantasized, "and the more she drinks, the more fun she and the guys will have."
Okay, hold on a moment, we'll get back to the Constitution in a minute.
It's one thing to break the ice with a gentlelady over an intoxicant. Or for a guy to get a woman drunk enough to not be bothered about going home with you, or to simply speak to you. But "the more she drinks" eventually has its limit, which is basically in the range of slobbering, vomiting or passing out. And this is Roy Den Hollander's idea of "fun" with a woman? Things about his lawsuit become more clear.
Of course, lowering the cost for men would draw SO many guys into bars that women would be stampeded out of the way by the thundering horde, leaving the place empty of people of the female persuasion, which puts us right back at the starting point.
And that starting point is - why in God's name would any rational male do anything to stop more women from joining him in a bar? Was Roy Hollander rejected once too often in a club? Is he simply cheap and wants to pay less for beer? Did he and those supporting him get dropped on their heads when young?
This lawsuit is not about social crusading. Mr. Hollander has stated quite clearly that he's all for getting the fairer sex as unearthly-drunk as possible - as cheaply as possible. And that's the issue, not human rights: bars want to get more women because men really like that, even Roy Ben Hollander.
Is it wrong for nightclubs to have Ladies' Nights in order to bring in more women to socialize with men? Is it discriminatory? Unconstitutional? For the sake of argument, let's stand on a bar stool and shout, "YES!!" to the rafters.
Who in their right mind cares??? And most importantly - why would anyone even a quarter-sane want to stop it?