Ohio panel sticks to 'White Only' pool sign ruling

Here we are in the year 2012. People everywhere talking about enlightenment and waking up, yet we can't even get out of the mindset of the late 19th and early 20th century. I understand that the pool owner has a right to protect his property but clearly other arrangements could have been made. We need to learn to come together as a society instead of us forcing a deeper wedge between us. Live together or die alone people.

news.yahoo.com...

A Cincinnati landlord who claimed a black girl's hair products clouded an apartment complex's swimming pool discriminated against the child by posting a poolside "White Only" sign, an Ohio civil rights panel said Thursday in upholding a previous finding.

The Ohio Civil Rights Commission voted 4-0 against reconsidering its finding from last fall. There was no discussion

reply to post by lcbjr1979


How about a "no hair product" sign. I've seen rivers get cloudy from certain hair stuff it can get messy.

OK. the headline is confusing and misleading. The sign was blatantly racist and I can't believe that someone thought that they could get away with posting it. But, if the LL was a racist why would she rent to the couple originally. The LL could have just said "hair products, oils and lotions not allowed in pool"

Seems pretty simple. Really poor journalism

because ...

Ohio panel sticks to 'No Hair Products' pool sign ruling, for $200. Alex.

... doesn't quite get the same 'attention', if you will. ?

funny. how that works.

no hair products but pee ok !!! ?

When I was young every female had to wear a bathing cap at the public swimming pool and the YMCA.
Seems like a simple solution.

Well Cincinnati is the home of modern day race riots.


Sooooooooo glad i live in Northern Ohio, this is ridiculous. Who would even think to put up a whites only sign? Is this 1940?

reply to post by lcbjr1979


I'd say that this guy is Enlightened.
He has stopped buying into the racial propaganda of how we are all the same.
He noticed that we are not.

Does that mean the President of the United States WON'T be able to swim there, also? Oh wait, yes he will....Bush is his daddy.

What a jackass. I can see a no hair products sign but that is ridiculous. Didn't she claim it was for historical purposes or something, I know in this article she said it was an antique but why does that matter? It makes me especially angry as the sign seemed to target a young lady. Low. I think it was rather classy of the father to not speak with reporters.

reply to post by Ookie


great comments. ATS has become a cesspool of racists and white nationalists.

I really don't know what to say about this ....... other than WOW!

My jaw is dropping as I read the comments, incredible how we can be this UN-enlightened in 2012!

The sign could have simply said NO hair products, but he/she went there!

Bad move with the sign, I hope they pay for it!

Originally posted by LongbottomLeaf
reply to post by lcbjr1979

 

How about a "no hair product" sign. I've seen rivers get cloudy from certain hair stuff it can get messy.

My thoughts exactly! Whites only discriminates and is ridiculous. I guess white people don't ever use hair products, huh?

Just black people? That owner should be ashamed and so should this Ohio Panel. It's down right racial discrimination!

Ban anyone with hair products in their hair from swimming. Don't ban an entire race....

What a world

Originally posted by lcbjr1979
Here we are in the year 2012. People everywhere talking about enlightenment and waking up, yet we can't even get out of the mindset of the late 19th and early 20th century. I understand that the pool owner has a right to protect his property but clearly other arrangements could have been made. We need to learn to come together as a society instead of us forcing a deeper wedge between us. Live together or die alone people.

Yep, it's a shame, but there are still plenty of people in America with that mentality. And I don't believe that this owner was interested in making any other 'arrangement', he's probably using this as an excuse to display his blatant racism. Ah well, it's his right, he owns it the property.

reply to post by lcbjr1979


And yes, if true, that black woman was irrisponseble for leaving her hair products around like that, but still, this was a weak ass attempt by the landlord to excuse his bigotry. As if all blacks are the same because of this incident right?

Originally posted by Southern Guardian

Originally posted by lcbjr1979
Here we are in the year 2012. People everywhere talking about enlightenment and waking up, yet we can't even get out of the mindset of the late 19th and early 20th century. I understand that the pool owner has a right to protect his property but clearly other arrangements could have been made. We need to learn to come together as a society instead of us forcing a deeper wedge between us. Live together or die alone people.

Yep, it's a shame, but there are still plenty of people in America with that mentality. And I don't believe that this owner was interested in making any other 'arrangement', he's probably using this as an excuse to display his blatant racism. Ah well, it's his right, he owns it the property.

You speak of others racism but yours flows like light form the sun. You seen the headline and ran with it. Never reading or even thinking about it. My how your enlightened your version of racism and sexism is. Your hatred of Caucasian males leaves a smoke trail for all to see.

I suggest you reread the article, and go home for your bottle and nap time already.