• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Starbucks in L.A. accused of racism after bathroom incident caught on video

Kreton said:
The white guy before him was allowed without purchasing anything, he was declined. Certainly implies race was a factor. The employee didn't know much else about them.
Click to expand...

Could it be the way he asked? Could it be a lot of requests were made and the manager put a stop to it? There could be lots of reasons including race for the desicion.
 
trouble13 said:
I got that but again that's not proof of racism. It's an indication that it might be the source, I will concede that, but not conclusive. Tagging someone as a racist is a pretty serious accusation it's kinda like the modern version of the scarlet letter. I think we should be more sure before throwing the accusation around. It's thrown around too ast and lose for my tastes.

Is there a new social room that says if a person of color is treated rudely the offender isn't simply an a hole but a racist too. Is it more abhorrent to disrespect a person of color than anyone else? That's my conflict here.

Sent from my SM-T800 using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

In some situations I may agree. For instance the 2 guys at the Starbucks in Philly. There is no real indication that they exempted white people from the rule. The manager there might have just been an asshole. However in this case the manager minutes before allowed a white guy in then immediately said no to a black guy. What is the difference? He had 2 strangers ask the same thing and he treated one differently than another. There is no indication that the 2nd man asked rudely. So what is the reason? Within reason race is seemingly the most likely answer. When race isn't a factor, an asshole is an asshole. Someone saying no to the restroom because they are a jerk would have said no to both.

So to answer your question it is not more abhorrent to treat a person of color than anyone else. If you are a dick to a white guy and a black guy then you are just a dick. But when you are only a dick when the person is the wrong race then it absolutely is more abhorrent.
 
Chillfolks said:
Could it be the way he asked? Could it be a lot of requests were made and the manager put a stop to it? There could be lots of reasons including race for the desicion.
Click to expand...

There is no information that he asked rudely or that the manager knew either person. When a manager puts a stop to it, you think it is exactly when a black guys asks seconds after a white guy is allowed? That seems far fetched.
 
Kreton said:
There is no information that he asked rudely or that the manager knew either person. When a manager puts a stop to it, you think it is exactly when a black guys asks seconds after a white guy is allowed? That seems far fetched.
Click to expand...

Ok so we don't know how he asked. Before we jump to conclusions let's figure out how it all started.
 
Chillfolks said:
Ok so we don't know how he asked. Before we jump to conclusions let's figure out how it all started.
Click to expand...

The video started after he was told no, so we can't see that. However he was not rude when he approached the other man or when he confronted the manager again. He was polite in the video that we have. There is no reason to assume he did anything wrong.
 
roguenuke said:
Something is up here. There is no way that another Starbucks manager would do this so recently unless he/she was completely retarded, within a day of a similar incident going public. I can't watch the video right now. Does it show the denial to him? Do we know who the random white guy is? What are the circumstances? Was there a camera with the guy? There are lots of questions. I know racism happens but not generally this blatantly. So I have to question the details of the story. There have certainly been times in the past when such things have actually been a setup to make some place or policy appear different than it is (Louder with Crowder comes to mind).
Click to expand...

The 'second' incident happened in January. The person re-posted the video following the more recent incident.
 
Kreton said:
The video started after he was told no, so we can't see that. However he was not rude when he approached the other man or when he confronted the manager again. He was polite in the video that we have. There is no reason to assume he did anything wrong.
Click to expand...


There is no need to jump to conclusions without all the info but you did. I'm saying I need more info to completely form a valid conclusion.
 
If they give anyone who asks the door code, why do all of these Starbucks have coded locks on the bathroom door? Why not have a door pull or knob like most other restaurants? If they aren't reserving the restrooms for customers, and limiting use by non-customers, who are they trying to keep out?
 
Kreton said:
In some situations I may agree. For instance the 2 guys at the Starbucks in Philly. There is no real indication that they exempted white people from the rule. The manager there might have just been an asshole. However in this case the manager minutes before allowed a white guy in then immediately said no to a black guy. What is the difference? He had 2 strangers ask the same thing and he treated one differently than another. There is no indication that the 2nd man asked rudely. So what is the reason? Within reason race is seemingly the most likely answer. When race isn't a factor, an asshole is an asshole. Someone saying no to the restroom because they are a jerk would have said no to both.

So to answer your question it is not more abhorrent to treat a person of color than anyone else. If you are a dick to a white guy and a black guy then you are just a dick. But when you are only a dick when the person is the wrong race then it absolutely is more abhorrent.
Click to expand...
I liked your post because I generally agree but I do diverge from you on this one point.

Unless you know something about the interaction that I don't we don't know why the white guy was allowed to use the bathroom but the black guy wasn't. I'm gonna reiterate something I said earlier. People giving off a negative aura tend to get negative reactions. I don't know but maybe the guy was denied the bathroom because he presented himself like an a-hole.

My first question in stories like these is do they have a history of discrimination

Sent from my SM-T800 using Tapatalk
 
dcsports said:
The 'second' incident happened in January. The person re-posted the video following the more recent incident.
Click to expand...

I saw that after, thank you. It is simply being presented as if it is newer.

This actually makes the Philly incident even more suspicious though, suggesting that it really may have been a setup based off of the claim made in the first video. The first video though does remind me very much of the Louder With Crowder type of videos, where they are editing out important parts. Additionally, that man was asked to leave only because he started filming the barista, not because he was trying to use the restroom without ordering. And he claimed he was planning on ordering something after he peed. If he had to go so badly that he couldn't order his drink first and go while waiting for it, then why did he hang out to ask another customer about his experience and start filming? That doesn't make any sense.
 
dcsports said:
If they give anyone who asks the door code, why do all of these Starbucks have coded locks on the bathroom door? Why not have a door pull or knob like most other restaurants? If they aren't reserving the restrooms for customers, and limiting use by non-customers, who are they trying to keep out?
Click to expand...

Their bathroom policy, while may intermittently enforced by different managers, is in general that paying customers get the code (many Starbucks seem to have started a system that prints the code on a receipt, which could be where others have gotten it without ordering, from someone else's receipt). This has been talked about since well before this incident.

https://www.reddit.com/r/starbucks/comments/5gz5x5/bathroom_policy_talk/

This comment thread is from 2016, over a year before the first incident.

Rosie - CollegeHumor Post

And this one is from 2013.

And then there is this one that clearly states that baristas and customers were informed of the policy change years ago.

https://www.commonwealmagazine.org/starbucks-locks-really

"When a woman asked the barista for the combination, she was reluctant to give it, I asked why. According to the barista there had been a change in policy meant to close the bathrooms to non-customers."
 
trouble13 said:
You think this evidence of institutional racism at starbucks? I guess what I'm struggling with is how ready people are to call someone racist everytime a person of color is treated rudely. People who give out negative vibes get negative responses regardless of skin color.
Click to expand...


I haven't seen anyone call it "institutional racism at Starbucks".


With the one in Philly, the accusation was leveled because (1) other customers regularly used the bathroom there without buying anything or getting asked to leave, (2) at least one other customer (white) had done the very same thing not long before the two black guys were asked to leave.

(The evidence is over in the now really long thread in General Politics and I'm not digging it up... )

Apparently the very same thing happened in this one. Doesn't that make you wonder why only those two were asked to leave, but not others that day and not others on other occasions? It doesn't have to be institutional. It can be two separate lone employees. But it still seems very odd if the people getting asked to leave aren't making trouble. If they aren't making trouble, one starts wondering what motivated it.
 
Mr Person said:
I haven't seen anyone call it "institutional racism at Starbucks".


With the one in Philly, the accusation was leveled because (1) other customers regularly used the bathroom there without buying anything or getting asked to leave, (2) at least one other customer (white) had done the very same thing not long before the two black guys were asked to leave.

(The evidence is over in the now really long thread in General Politics and I'm not digging it up... )

Apparently the very same thing happened in this one. Doesn't that make you wonder why only those two were asked to leave, but not others that day and not others on other occasions? It doesn't have to be institutional. It can be two separate lone employees. But it still seems very odd if the people getting asked to leave aren't making trouble. If they aren't making trouble, one starts wondering what motivated it.
Click to expand...
So why do you leap to racism if you wonder what the motivation was. Do they not let any blackpeople use their bathrooms?

Sent from my SM-T800 using Tapatalk
 
Kreton said:
The white guy before him was allowed without purchasing anything, he was declined. Certainly implies race was a factor. The employee didn't know much else about them.
Click to expand...

Allegedly, all we have is snippets from an edited video, which do not show anyone being given or refused a code, it’s heresay.
 
Mr Person said:
I haven't seen anyone call it "institutional racism at Starbucks".


With the one in Philly, the accusation was leveled because (1) other customers regularly used the bathroom there without buying anything or getting asked to leave, (2) at least one other customer (white) had done the very same thing not long before the two black guys were asked to leave.

(The evidence is over in the now really long thread in General Politics and I'm not digging it up... )

Apparently the very same thing happened in this one. Doesn't that make you wonder why only those two were asked to leave, but not others that day and not others on other occasions? It doesn't have to be institutional. It can be two separate lone employees. But it still seems very odd if the people getting asked to leave aren't making trouble. If they aren't making trouble, one starts wondering what motivated it.
Click to expand...

I posted at least one other occasion where yes someone else was asked to leave (or have the police called on them). A white couple. Why is that ignored? There are so many factors that can easily play into why they were asked to leave and others were not. We do not have all the information here. We have a lot of hearsay.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom