Reader comments · New Zealand: B&B owner says ‘not in my home’ to lesbian couple · PinkNews

Enter your email address to receive our daily LGBT news roundup

You're free to unsubscribe at any time.


New Zealand: B&B owner says ‘not in my home’ to lesbian couple

Post your comment

Comments on this article are now closed.

Reader comments

  1. homophobes and god botherers…ALWAYS think about sex first. they are obsessed. u’m sure its because they dont get any.

    1. Presumably he has hidden cameras in all the rooms otherwise he wouldn’t know what sort of sex his guests were having?

      In the room information does it list acceptable sexual practices for straight guests?

      Does he approve of condoms? Does he ask guests if they plan to have sex purely for pleasure or if they are trying to conceive?

      What about miscegenation?

      1. If they had been a straight couple, unmarried (fornication), perhaps married but previously divorced following adultery there would have been no problem. Yet all of the above are condemned in the bible. Bigotry dressed up as religious belief.

  2. “…“It’s my own personal integrity to say I don’t want same-sex sex in my house….”

    He’s assuming all same-sex relationships are 110% about sex, and nothing else, ever.
    There is more to loving someone than only having sex with them. His overly simplistic view of a couple’s love really reflects badly on himself and his own expectations.

    1. It’s reasonable to assume that people sleeping together in a double bed MAY have sex with each other.

      If the B and B owner doesn’t want homosexual sex, or adulterous sex, or premarital sex, or any other kind of sex in his home, then those are the rules, and if you don’t like them you go elsewhere.

      This is a bit like going to a restaurant and ordering a steak, and when they tell you that it’s a vegetarian restaurant and doesn’t serve meat, you claim you were discriminated against because you are a meat-eater. If you want to eat a steak, go to a restaurant that serves steak. If you want to have gay sex in a hotel, go to a hotel that will allow it.

      1. Nope. Sorry.

      2. Go stick your lame comment up your R’se JohnE

      3. Christopher Coleman 12 May 2013, 12:00am

        It ceases to their own home when they turn into a money making business. They can have any house rules they like, but they cannot conflict with with the law of the land. If they are allowed to turn away a lesbian couple, they can turn away a black couple. Would you also defend that? Anyone with strong views about who can have sex with whom should not be in this business. Even if a couple take a room with single beds, they can still have sex.

        1. well said, You want to open your “home” doily’s and all to the general public then you have to live by the rules love.

      4. From the article: “The couple then drove 50 kilometres to Waipu Cove to find alternative accomodation.”
        New Zealand isn’t exactly Central London. If you’re in a rural location, it could well be that said B&B has a monopoly of local accommodation.
        I’m guessing they had to pay for their own fuel to travel a further 50 kilometers. Or do you suppose the B&B owner was kind enough to cover that expense to compensate for his rejection of them?

      5. justusboyz 12 May 2013, 9:46am

        What a ridiculous comment JohnE you cannot compare a restaurant it has a menu! there was no sign outside the b &b describing the sort of sex people are allowed to have inorder to gain entry. Further how presumptuous to assume they were going to have sex and actually its none of their business

        1. Spanner1960 12 May 2013, 6:49pm

          I wonder what JohnE would say if they had a sign saying “No gays or lesbians”?
          Or even “No blacks, Asians, gypsies or athiests”

      6. JohnE – your analogy doesn’t work. The equivalent would be a couple going in to a vegetarian restaurant and ordering a vegetarian meal – then not being served because they’re gay/black/whatever.

        This couple simply wanted to use the same facilities as any other visitor.

        More than that – why on earth should any B&B owner be so very concerned with what their guests may or may not do in bed?? Creepy!

      7. JohnE’s comment reminded me that sign that long time ago pubs used to have outside their doors: No blacks, no uniforms, no dogs (allowed).
        This is wrong, commercial establishments cease to have their “own rules” and should adhere to the law.

      8. JohnE, you have revealed your homophobia with full transparency, for all the world to see.

        Your analogy is logically absurd. Childish, in fact.

        The B&B offers beds and breakfast. That’s precisely what the customers wanted. The owners however retracted the offer based on their own bigoted assumptions of the customers.

        To help you see why your example was so laughable, let me re-work it for you, as follows:

        “This is a bit like going to an ordinary non-vegetarian restaurant and ordering a steak, and when they then tell you that it’s a vegetarian restaurant which doesn’t serve meat, you claim you are being discriminated against for some reason. You are indeed being discriminate against for you have entered an ordinary non-vegetarian restaurant for steak, and regardless of the mental illnesses suffered by the proprietors, you are entitled to your steak.”

      9. Simple fact is, if you don’t want any guests having sex in your home then don’t open your home up to the public!

  3. Prosecute.

  4. New Zealand’s Human Rights Act 1993 banned discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation when it comes to employment, accomodation and service provision. Trust stupid fundies at the arse-end of nowhere to be ignorant of what has been the law of the land for the last twenty years…

    1. In my view you messed your statement up by the ‘arse-end’ reference. How do you think the people of New Zealand or Whangarei (which is a fabulously beautiful location) feel reading that. Was that really necessary ?

      1. Yes, indeed, Craig pulled the rug from under his own feet when he described Whangarei as “the arse-end of nowhere”. His expression revealed arrogance. But it also revealed ignorance as Whangarei is an extremely beautiful and desirable place to be, as the following images indicate.

  5. I wouldn’t prosecute. I would just spend my hard earned money at a hotel which does not discriminate.

    1. Christopher Coleman 12 May 2013, 12:03am

      And make it known as widely as possible that this B&B should be avoided by LGBT folk and all gay-friendly people. It is easy to do in these days of social media.

    2. prosecuting= compensation and bad publicity for b&b involved

      1. And would make it known that the owner has an interest in the sexual activities of guests?

    3. SamB, one must always actively FIGHT bigotry, not simply “go elsewhere”.

      If all of us gays and lesbians just went elsewhere, we’d all eventually end up on one island because we would have permitted bigotry to flourish and reject us everywhere.

  6. why did they assume the couple were going to have sex? Maybe they just wanted to sleep in the same bed, the way many heterosexual unmarried couples do.

    1. Because bigots see us as monsters of depravity, craven lustful sex-hungry beasts who simply can’t “leave it alone”. We are everything that they feel guilty about.

      This is their justification for demeaning us as they do.

      The real problem of religionists are those damned old collections of primitive parchments that they follow to the letter.

      They need to burn their bibiles, their korans, their torahs, and all the other “holy writings”.

  7. Do they also refuse admission to remarried divorcees? Probably not – but this is strongly condemned in the NT – much more than same sex relations. Do I hear the sound of `Hypocrisy!’ ? Or is it `Bigotry!’. It certainly has nothing to do with religion.

  8. I’d like to say that I wouldn’t stay in this lodge because of their discriminatory accommodations policy, but the truth is I would never stay there because it’s hideous. No self-respecting gay man would stay in that dump. Why not send them an email and tell them? pilgrimplanet dot co dot nz

    1. Remember, religionists of all sorts thrive on what they interpret as “persecution because of our faith”. They positively thrive on it. It makes them feel special.

  9. From last summer: “Gay couple discriminated against, B.C. tribunal rules” “B & B owners order to pay about $4,400 in penalties and compensation”

    The wingnuts make a big fuss about this and the UK case when they lose, getting international media coverage, then ignore the law when they know the rules. And these people are telling everyone else how moral they are? Gimme a break.

  10. “…“It’s my own personal integrity to say I don’t want same-sex sex in my house….

    The thing is it was not “their house” the couple were staying in. It was publicly advertised. As soon as you start advertising your home as short stay accommodation the whole interpretation of a home is changes.

    The owners would have been best to consult their lawyer before they self interpreted New Zealand’s human right legislation. What they have done is interpreted to suit their bigotry and that won’t work for them.

    Great to see these people being called out – just the way accommodation owners were called out when apartheid systems were demolished.

  11. hope they feel very proud of themselves. such big persons with such magnanimous hearts.

    1. The sad thing is they probably do feel proud of being so hateful in the name of their religion.

      1. as if forcing a couple to sleep on separate beds would preclude them from having sex, lol… bigoted and stupid.

        1. But the goal of bigots like this is to make you feel unwelcome and get you entirely out of their “home”. Even if the two lesbians had accepted the two singles, the owners would no doubt have continued in all sorts of subtle ways to make them feel unwelcome. Bigots like this don’t get their fix unless they see evidence that they are imparting their sacred message.

          All religions are a form of mental illness.

  12. These places should be forced by law to advertise any rules like this up front and at time of booking.

    They would soon go out of business as even straight couples would not want to go some where they feel they will be judged.

    I know they should not be allowed to discriminate but I personally would like to stop in a place that is not being forced to take us.

    1. Julian Morrison 12 May 2013, 12:32pm

      It’s not that simple. I’m sure you’ve heard of “no blacks, no dogs, no Irish” signs – those weren’t hidden away. Bigots have, historically, had no problem being seen practising their bigotry in public.

      As a rule, the ban comes first, the shame comes second. And a ban must not just exist, but be used, repeatedly, until the bigoted behavior is driven out of normality. Shame only happens when what the bigots are doing is unusual and out of step.

  13. What kind of person looks at a loving couple and thinks “SEX SEX SEX”?

    What business is it of his what a same sex couple may or may not do in bed? But I don’t think that that was the point. It was just an opprotunity to discriminate and make the women feel bad. What self-righteous, sanctimonious, ignorant B&B owners !

    1. In my experience most men think that when they themselves aren’t getting any – except on birthdays when he probably gets to bugger his wife’s ass – cause that ain’t sodomy cause they are married!!!!!

  14. When are these people going to learn. If you run a B&B, it’s not ‘your home’, it’s a cheap smelling hotel. He should have his licence cancelled.

  15. Jock S. Trap 12 May 2013, 10:57am

    This homophobic bullying, yet again… just because bigoted people only see sex not people? Seriously?

    Then They talk about morals.

    Is disgusting and completely unnecessary. Also if you have a business open to the public only part of it it Your home, the rest you have offered to the public.

    If you need to pick and chose then you are in the wrong business and I hope it fails.

    1. Briliant! :D

      1. Yes, indeed! And I see that 15 people have so far recommended that review (the one titled “Lovely, Lovely Hosts!”) as helpful. I wonder how long it will be before the bigots have it removed.

  16. OUTLAW ORGANISED RELIGION – There clearly is NO GOD – why are we allowing these fraudsters to hide their hatred and bigotry behind some out dated superstition – ENOUGH ALREADY!

  17. That There Other David 12 May 2013, 12:45pm

    Another b&b owner who doesn’t seem to get that it’s not your home when you start taking in paying guests. Instead you become a business owner who happens to live on site. If they really can’t cope with that then the hospitality business is not for them. Sell up and move on.

  18. So disappointing to hear this, hot on the heels of Marriage Equality being achieved in New Zealand. I guess some bigots are taking revenge. I hope they get well and truly sorted out, and made an example of, so that other bigots take note.

    1. Never mind Eddy, we’re getting quite good at booting fundies up the backside down here :)

  19. It’s very simple – it is illegal to discriminate when you run a public business, even a business in which you live. If not, then people could refuse to deal with any group, if they also happen to live upstairs. If you don’t want specific people in your home, then don’t open a B&B.

  20. Must be related to that couple from the Chymorvah.

  21. douglas in canada 13 May 2013, 12:29am

    I’m not at all in favor of discrimination, but just once, I’d love to own a restaurant, and if I ever saw someone bow their head to say a prayer before a meal, I’d go over to them, and say, “I’m sorry, we don’t allow that here. You will have to leave immediately. We have children around and we don’t want to prevent them from knowing that stupid people exist – people who believe in mythical creatures – but we don’t want them exposed to such fools in person.”

    Then show them to the door.

    1. Robert in S. Kensington 13 May 2013, 11:58am

      I concur, Douglas. You can bet they’d be the first to scream and play the “abuse of religious freedom” card. They want carte blanche to discriminate with impunity and impose their deliberately chosen religious addiction on the rest of society including government. The Abrahamic cults for the most part are the bastion of bigotry, hypocrisy, misogyny and homophobia.

  22. GulliverUK 13 May 2013, 8:53am

    Behavior like this is not only illegal, it damaged the B&B / guest house industry because all of us with be anxious that we too might meet Tubbs and Edward types (like League of Gentlemen) and it just seems easier is every LGBT person boycotts all B&Bs, everywhere. And frankly, even as a little boy, going on holiday, staying in B&Bs you sometimes got the sense that you were glad to get out of there as the hosts didn’t seem to like …. people !! That’s reputational damage to the industry, hurting every B&B, because of the actions of a few who shouldn’t even be in that industry. How man others, who weren’t able to be identified as LGBT have been turned away? The law on goods and services must be very strict, and weed out the bad B&Bs. I’m sure there are many Christians who are happy to provide their services without prejudice, but fundamentalism like this will damage their reputation also. Perhaps the way is for people to advertise LGBT inclusiveness !

  23. Blimey Keith, you’re frothing more than ever today. Bad night of it or something? Calm down dear, and do a bit of research into what places of business are and are not allowed to do.

    *pats hand*

  24. “For sure”? To what extent are you “sure” that the rules would have been the same for non-gay people?

These comments are un-moderated and do not necessarily represent the views of PinkNews. If you believe that a comment is inappropriate or libellous, please contact us.