# Legality of limiting a movie theater to one gender only **URL:** \ **Category:** Factual Questions\ **Created:** [May 25, 2017, 8:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/legality-of-limiting-a-movie-theater-to-one-gender-only/787439 "2017-05-25T20:27:23Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 3
**Author:** ![DSYoungEsq](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/c6cbf5/32.png) [@DSYoungEsq](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DSYoungEsq)\ **Post date:** [May 27, 2017, 11:14am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/legality-of-limiting-a-movie-theater-to-one-gender-only/787439/41 "2017-05-27T11:14:35Z")
> [@Ranger\_Jeff](#): > > Don’t bars have “Ladies’ Nights”? Discrimination or marketing. > > What sort of damages is a guy going to endure because he can’t get into Thursday nights 9 pm showing of Wonder Woman anyway? There’s probably 8 and 10 pm showings for all genders in the 2nd viewing room down the way anyway. As I indicated upthread, in California, Ladies’ Nights are banned by operation of that state’s civil rights act, which protects against gender discrimination. So, if you have a gender discrimination statute, yes, technically such promotions can be violations of it. The damages a person gets for being discriminated at a specific time of day is the same regardless of whether or not there are other times that that discrimination doesn’t exist. Ask yourself: would it be ok to have a “blacks only” showing or a “whites only” showing at 9 pm, just because the 8 pm and 10 pm showings aren’t restricted? When your answer to this becomes (as it should), “no”, then the fact that the restriction is gender-based rather than racially-based makes no difference. ---
**Author:** ![Chronos](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/chronos/32/134_2.png) [@Chronos](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Chronos)\ **Post date:** [May 27, 2017, 1:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/legality-of-limiting-a-movie-theater-to-one-gender-only/787439/42 "2017-05-27T13:43:44Z")
> [@](#): > > Quoth **DSYoungEsq** : > > But in this specific instance? In this specific instance, _as with all other instances_, the question of whether it’s moral or not is completely independent of whether it’s legal or not. So if you’re asking about morality, why bring up legality at all? ---
**Author:** ![Gary\_T](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/3ec8ea/32.png) [@Gary\_T](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Gary_T)\ **Post date:** [May 27, 2017, 5:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/legality-of-limiting-a-movie-theater-to-one-gender-only/787439/43 "2017-05-27T17:15:08Z")
> [@watchwolf49](#): > > … it’s a bit of a grey area and note that theoretically the men also enjoy the benefit half-price drinks for the ladies when they’re buying … Somehow I don’t think the privilege of buying drinks for someone else, even at a reduced price, would stand up as a benefit in a court case. > [@](#): > > … not to mention the benefit of having a bar full of drunk women … But I would love to see a court rule on the legal benefit suggested here. ---
**Author:** ![suranyi](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/e36b37/32.png) [@suranyi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/suranyi)\ **Post date:** [May 27, 2017, 6:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/legality-of-limiting-a-movie-theater-to-one-gender-only/787439/44 "2017-05-27T18:02:13Z")
> [@DSYoungEsq](#): > > As I indicated upthread, in California, Ladies’ Nights are banned by operation of that state’s civil rights act, which protects against gender discrimination. So, if you have a gender discrimination statute, yes, technically such promotions can be violations of it. > > The damages a person gets for being discriminated at a specific time of day is the same regardless of whether or not there are other times that that discrimination doesn’t exist. Ask yourself: would it be ok to have a “blacks only” showing or a “whites only” showing at 9 pm, just because the 8 pm and 10 pm showings aren’t restricted? When your answer to this becomes (as it should), “no”, then the fact that the restriction is gender-based rather than racially-based makes no difference. Yet in California, ladies only gyms are perfectly ok. “Curves” franchises are everywhere. ---
**Author:** ![Velocity](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/velocity/32/18006_2.png) [@Velocity](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Velocity)\ **Post date:** [May 27, 2017, 7:03pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/legality-of-limiting-a-movie-theater-to-one-gender-only/787439/45 "2017-05-27T19:03:35Z")
> [@suranyi](#): > > Yet in California, ladies only gyms are perfectly ok. “Curves” franchises are everywhere. Yes, but isn’t the argument that women have special need for a women-only gym, in a way that does not apply to a “women need their own movie screening” case? And even if so, Austin law may be stricter than California law; Austin Title 5 Article 2 Section 4 still says that a public accommodation may not “limit” on the basis of gender(even if men can watch 98% of all showings, and women can watch 100% of all showings, then that means the men were “limited.”) It also says that people must have “full and equal enjoyment” of the public accommodation - and, again, even if men can watch 98% of all showings, and women can watch 100% of all showings, then that means the men did not have “full and equal” access. ---
**Author:** ![DSYoungEsq](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/c6cbf5/32.png) [@DSYoungEsq](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DSYoungEsq)\ **Post date:** [May 28, 2017, 1:41am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/legality-of-limiting-a-movie-theater-to-one-gender-only/787439/46 "2017-05-28T01:41:27Z")
> [@suranyi](#): > > Yet in California, ladies only gyms are perfectly ok. “Curves” franchises are everywhere. No, in California, they are not only not “ok”, they violate the Unruh Civil Rights Act. As a result, Curves admits men to their gyms in California, and in other states where their business model would violate anti-discrimination laws. Several states have passed specific exemptions from gender-discrimination laws to allow gyms to be limited to women-only. See for example the discussion [here after a ruling against a women-only gym in Santa Rosa](http://standyourground.com/forums/index.php?topic=11927.0), CA. ---
**Author:** ![kaylasdad99](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/kaylasdad99/32/3398_2.png) [@kaylasdad99](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/kaylasdad99)\ **Post date:** [May 28, 2017, 1:45am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/legality-of-limiting-a-movie-theater-to-one-gender-only/787439/47 "2017-05-28T01:45:37Z")
> [@DSYoungEsq](#): > > As I indicated upthread, in California, Ladies’ Nights are banned by operation of that state’s civil rights act, which protects against gender discrimination. So, if you have a gender discrimination statute, yes, technically such promotions can be violations of it. > > The damages a person gets for being discriminated at a specific time of day is the same regardless of whether or not there are other times that that discrimination doesn’t exist. Ask yourself: would it be ok to have a “blacks only” showing or a “whites only” showing at 9 pm, just because the 8 pm and 10 pm showings aren’t restricted? When your answer to this becomes (as it should), “no”, then the fact that the restriction is gender-based rather than racially-based makes no difference. I first learned of this over forty years ago, when it was explained to me why car washes had stopped running “Ladies’ Days” promotions. ETA: usually on Wednesdays, IIRC… ---
**Author:** ![Dale\_Sams](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/779978/32.png) [@Dale\_Sams](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Dale_Sams)\ **Post date:** [May 28, 2017, 4:27am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/legality-of-limiting-a-movie-theater-to-one-gender-only/787439/48 "2017-05-28T04:27:44Z")
WB should tell Alamo it won’t be allowed to…you know…its too late now. WB should have clamped down immediatly. IMHO this is going to hurt sales in a certain demo. And if not…well i certainly don’t think its helped. ---
**Author:** ![Velocity](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/velocity/32/18006_2.png) [@Velocity](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Velocity)\ **Post date:** [May 28, 2017, 7:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/legality-of-limiting-a-movie-theater-to-one-gender-only/787439/49 "2017-05-28T19:38:48Z")
> [@Dale\_Sams](#): > > WB should tell Alamo it won’t be allowed to…you know…its too late now. WB should have clamped down immediatly. IMHO this is going to hurt sales in a certain demo. > > And if not…well i certainly don’t think its helped. Does a movie producer still have control over how a theater may show its movie? ---
**Author:** ![suranyi](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/e36b37/32.png) [@suranyi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/suranyi)\ **Post date:** [May 29, 2017, 5:47am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/legality-of-limiting-a-movie-theater-to-one-gender-only/787439/50 "2017-05-29T05:47:36Z")
> [@DSYoungEsq](#): > > No, in California, they are not only not “ok”, they violate the Unruh Civil Rights Act. As a result, Curves admits men to their gyms in California, and in other states where their business model would violate anti-discrimination laws. Several states have passed specific exemptions from gender-discrimination laws to allow gyms to be limited to women-only. > > See for example the discussion [here after a ruling against a women-only gym in Santa Rosa](http://standyourground.com/forums/index.php?topic=11927.0), CA. Huh, that’s news to me. Ignorance fought. ---
**Author:** ![JcWoman](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/jcwoman/32/2889_2.png) [@JcWoman](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/JcWoman)\ **Post date:** [May 29, 2017, 12:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/legality-of-limiting-a-movie-theater-to-one-gender-only/787439/51 "2017-05-29T12:19:53Z")
> [@Dale\_Sams](#): > > WB should tell Alamo it won’t be allowed to…you know…its too late now. WB should have clamped down immediatly. IMHO this is going to hurt sales in a certain demo. > > And if not…well i certainly don’t think its helped. That “demo” had better not read about where Wonder Woman came from, or they’ll pop a gasket. ---
**Author:** ![Nava](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/da6949/32.png) [@Nava](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Nava)\ **Post date:** [May 29, 2017, 12:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/legality-of-limiting-a-movie-theater-to-one-gender-only/787439/52 "2017-05-29T12:39:34Z")
> [@kayT](#): > > Pretty sure it’s illegal but why don’t they just have an additional, special showing before regular hours or after regular hours? Why would a show be ok or not depending on the time? 😕 ---
**Author:** ![Dale\_Sams](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/779978/32.png) [@Dale\_Sams](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Dale_Sams)\ **Post date:** [May 29, 2017, 2:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/legality-of-limiting-a-movie-theater-to-one-gender-only/787439/53 "2017-05-29T14:49:36Z")
> [@JcWoman](#): > > That “demo” had better not read about where Wonder Woman came from, or they’ll pop a gasket. Which origin? Made from clay? The product of Hercules raping Hippolyta? ---
**Author:** ![kayT](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/kayt/32/3633_2.png) [@kayT](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/kayT)\ **Post date:** [May 29, 2017, 3:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/legality-of-limiting-a-movie-theater-to-one-gender-only/787439/54 "2017-05-29T15:56:46Z")
> [@Nava](#): > > Why would a show be ok or not depending on the time? 😕 As I said, if it was a special showing! Not part of the regular schedule. It’s possible for the theater to be closed to the public and show a film for a specific group. Maybe the group has to pay or something, but this is a thing that is done. ---
**Author:** ![Johanna](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/johanna/32/8318_2.png) [@Johanna](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Johanna)\ **Post date:** [May 29, 2017, 11:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/legality-of-limiting-a-movie-theater-to-one-gender-only/787439/55 "2017-05-29T23:21:25Z")
> [@kayT](#): > > As I said, if it was a special showing! Not part of the regular schedule. It’s possible for the theater to be closed to the public and show a film for a specific group. Maybe the group has to pay or something, but this is a thing that is done. I think **kayT** ’s post answers the OP and settles the matter. ---
**Author:** ![Robot\_Arm](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/robot_arm/32/18280_2.png) [@Robot\_Arm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Robot_Arm)\ **Post date:** [May 30, 2017, 12:03am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/legality-of-limiting-a-movie-theater-to-one-gender-only/787439/56 "2017-05-30T00:03:54Z")
> [@kayT](#): > > As I said, if it was a special showing! Not part of the regular schedule. It’s possible for the theater to be closed to the public and show a film for a specific group. Maybe the group has to pay or something, but this is a thing that is done. > [@Johanna](#): > > I think **kayT** ’s post answers the OP and settles the matter. I’m not sure that it does. If I want to rent a movie theater for a birthday party or something, and only invite my friends, that’s one thing. But if I rent a theater and then start selling tickets to the event, don’t I become a public accommodation (and subject to such laws) just as if the theater sold tickets directly? ---
**Author:** ![Johnny\_Bravo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/johnny_bravo/32/493_2.png) [@Johnny\_Bravo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Johnny_Bravo)\ **Post date:** [May 30, 2017, 12:25am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/legality-of-limiting-a-movie-theater-to-one-gender-only/787439/57 "2017-05-30T00:25:19Z")
> [@Johanna](#): > > I think **kayT** ’s post answers the OP and settles the matter. How do you figure? By that logic, a theater could contract its “regular” schedule and simply create a whole bunch of “extra showings” which it limits to women or men or white people or whatever else you might choose to imagine. The theater is either open or closed. Special showings don’t magically erase the its status as a public accommodation. Now, if a group of local women had created a Facebook page called “Friends of Lynda” and that group had contacted the theater for a private showing, there would probably be no issue at all - whether the showing was part of the regular schedule or not. Same if the Klan wanted to buy out a showing. I remember church groups buying out theaters when Passion of the Christ came out. But in none of those circumstances is the **theater** dictating who may or may not attend the show. Ticket resale laws vary by state. I have no idea how they would interact with discrimination stuff. ---
**Author:** ![Velocity](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/velocity/32/18006_2.png) [@Velocity](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Velocity)\ **Post date:** [May 30, 2017, 12:29am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/legality-of-limiting-a-movie-theater-to-one-gender-only/787439/58 "2017-05-30T00:29:22Z")
> [@Johanna](#): > > I think **kayT** ’s post answers the OP and settles the matter. As **Robot Arm** and \*\*Johnny Bravo \*\*point out, there is still a difference. If a woman buys out the entire auditorium on a private-event reservation, and then invites 100 of her friends (all women,) then this doesn’t break the law; it’s a private function. She is the one discriminating, not the business/theater itself. But if the theater itself holds a women-only event, then it is breaking the law, because it is a public accommodation and the woman-only event is taking place under the auspices of the public accommodation. ---
**Author:** ![Johanna](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/johanna/32/8318_2.png) [@Johanna](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Johanna)\ **Post date:** [May 30, 2017, 1:31am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/legality-of-limiting-a-movie-theater-to-one-gender-only/787439/59 "2017-05-30T01:31:07Z")
I still think the way that \*\*kayT \*\*framed it, it would hold up as a legal defense, or at least stand a fighting chance… ---
**Author:** ![Cayuga](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/3e96dc/32.png) [@Cayuga](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Cayuga)\ **Post date:** [May 30, 2017, 10:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/legality-of-limiting-a-movie-theater-to-one-gender-only/787439/60 "2017-05-30T22:50:42Z")
> [@Velocity](#): > > Does a movie producer still have control over how a theater may show its movie? I believe that the producing studio(s) do not, but the distributor (which may be WB Distribution (or whatever) in this case) does, at least to a certain extent. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/legality-of-limiting-a-movie-theater-to-one-gender-only/787439.md?page=2) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/legality-of-limiting-a-movie-theater-to-one-gender-only/787439.md?page=4)