Bus driver forces gay couple to sit at the back of the bus

[Mr. X]

ALBUQUERQUE (KRQE) - It wasn't exactly a warm welcome for a couple of Albuquerque visitors.

It was the week of Albuquerque's Pride Festival when a gay couple says they flew into the city.

Just minutes after arriving and getting their bags, they said a shuttle bus driver at the airport forced them to sit in the back of the bus because they were holding hands.

This happened about a month ago, but the couple said they still haven't received a formal apology from the shuttle bus company and they are considering legal action.

Ron McCoy and his partner, Chris Bowers, flew into Albuquerque from Portland, Ore., on Friday, June 28 — two days after the nation's highest court made historic rulings for same-sex marriage couples and the day before Albuquerque's PrideFest.

The couple was here for a long-awaited road trip through the Southwest, but their excitement soon died down.

McCoy said he and his partner sat in the front of a shuttle bus, holding hands when a driver discriminated against them.

"I saw him look at us, look down at his hands and he looked so angry," McCoy said. "He just blurted out at me, he goes, "'Okay, if you're going to do that, you're going to the back of the bus.'"

Shocked and not wanting to cause problems, the couple obeyed.

Once the shuttle stopped at its destination, however, the couple asked the driver why he forced them to move.

"I said, 'I think it was because you didn't like the fact that I was holding my partner's hand.' He goes, 'See, now you're telling on yourself.' My partner responds, 'Well, that's discrimination,' and the driver responds, 'You're telling on yourself again,'" McCoy said.

A woman, originally from Albuquerque, witnessed the confrontation and jumped in.

"I told the bus driver that I was completely appalled that anybody would be treated this way," said Bernadette Aguirre.

"And the driver looks back at us and goes, 'I'll show you what's appalling,' and he points to us," McCoy said.

The Sunport contracts with private company, Standard Parking, to run the rental car shuttle buses.

"First and foremost, it is absolutely unacceptable," said Dan Jiron, Sunport spokesperson. "We immediately got in touch with Standard Parking to assess what exactly happened. They acknowledged this was a mistake on the part of the driver."

But McCoy says no one ever apologized to him or Bowers.

"I took it personally, and I'm still upset," McCoy said. "I don't have any closure. Neither of us do."

McCoy said before flying home, he and his partner had a different shuttle driver and had no problems while holding hands.

The two say they filed a complaint with the American Civil Liberties Union.

A Standard Parking manager told KRQE News 13 that the driver was inappropriate and got carried away, although he did not consider it discrimination.

The driver in question is still working for Standard Parking.

The manager said he has worked for the company for more than 10 years, and they have never had problems with him in the past.

The company will now require all drivers to take sensitivity training.

https://www.krqe.com/dpp/features/gay-couple-forced-to-back-of-bus

Looks like this bus driver wants to do things like they were in the old days - Force anyone diffrient from you to sit in the back.

 

[twocows]

What a jerk. He should have to make a formal apology to them if he wants to keep working.

 

[Entermaid]

I do think it is wrong for a bus driver to treat this couple in such a derogatory fashion. The couple made a complaint to the company, which is great, it allows the business to take action to fix issues that both affect customers and their business reputation.

However, it does get a bit ridiculous when the couple says they do not have closure or as if this ordeal has made a major impact on their lives given that they are STILL upset. This, is just one of those stories that makes LGBT people appear to have paper-thin hides and quick to use litigation for minuscule annoyances. Further, the ACLU adds fuel to the fire by legitimizing these minute offenses and affirming the negative image when they take on these cases. Again, there are substantive cases involving the LGBT community, but this is not one of them.

If this were myself, I would have simply not moved and filed a complaint to the business afterward.

 

[Sydian]

Had to check the calendar. Thought it was the 1960's for a second there.

 

[Kanzler]

I think I would've moved back if I was in their position. How does the whole "stand by your principles" vs. the "don't cause any trouble" conflict play out for the rest of you?

 

[Sir Codin]

This definitely cements my view that the gay rights movement is now mirroring the civil rights movement.

 

[Elaitenstile]

This definitely cements my view that the gay rights movement is now mirroring the civil rights movement.

I was about to suggest the same thing.

Really needed to check the calendar today

 

[Silais]

Is the United States reverting back to the pre-Civil Rights era when it comes to equality?

 

[Entermaid]

^ I can't tell if this is sarcasm or hyperbole.

I know an elderly lady that called a friend of mine a n***er, does that mean that her individual actions speak to racism becoming more prevalent in the United States on a broader scale? Obviously not since the treatment of Black Americans and rights afforded to them has improved ten-fold since over the past century.

If this same bus story had happened in the 90's, it would have been non-news. Most Americans would have agreed with the bus driver, at least to an extent. Just as society would have condoned such actions against Black Americans in the early 20th Century. This one incident doesn't speak to the attitude of the American Public in a broad sense that largely would disagree with the actions of the bus driver since this is not a customary practice of our culture. And since the trend of Americans that are accepting of same sex relationship has jumped nearly 20 percentage points since 2001 according to Gallup Polls, it would appear that aversion to same sex relations is rapidly depleting.

 

[Silais]

^ I can't tell if this is sarcasm or hyperbole.

I know an elderly lady that called a friend of mine a n***er, does that mean that her individual actions speak to racism becoming more prevalent in the United States on a broader scale? Obviously not since the treatment of Black Americans and rights afforded to them has improved ten-fold since over the past century.

If this same bus story had happened in the 90's, it would have been non-news. Most Americans would have agreed with the bus driver, at least to an extent. Just as society would have condoned such actions against Black Americans in the early 20th Century. This one incident doesn't speak to the attitude of the American Public in a broad sense that largely would disagree with the actions of the bus driver since this is not a customary practice of our culture. And since the trend of Americans that are accepting of same sex relationship has jumped nearly 20 percentage points since 2001 according to Gallup Polls, it would appear that aversion to same sex relations is rapidly depleting.

Of course one incident does not indicate that the entirety of a vast majority of the population has the same mindset. I'm aware of that. However, I do believe that there are a lot of these sorts of cases that are not reported and the ones that are should be regarded as a serious issue.

 

[Star-Lord]

I agree with Fenneking, cases like this really make it seem like LGBT lobbyists don't have a legitimate cause and just want to pick a fight with individual homophobes. If a company or institution was being deliberately discriminatory i'd understand but this is just one guy that doesn't like gays. So what.

Are you just going to completely ignore the fact that when you hire a person they represent your company? "One guy that doesn't like gays" is under the name of an entire brand and then that entire brand is reflected upon because of one person's behavior. It's not a matter of someone's preferences for gay people; it's about professionalism and respect from a company to customers.

and for once I walked into a thread and agreed with what twocows said so that has to say something.

 

[Esper]

Of course this may seem like just a small thing to some of us, and maybe it is, but even if it is we can't let it make us believe that all gay people have paper-thin sensibilities. And then we should think about whether it is really a non-issue in the first place.

I know an elderly lady that called a friend of mine a n***er, does that mean that her individual actions speak to racism becoming more prevalent in the United States on a broader scale? Obviously not since the treatment of Black Americans and rights afforded to them has improved ten-fold since over the past century.

Does the old lady say this to customers while working for a company that excuses her actions? It's the way the management handled things that I think is the real kicker of this story.

 

[Entermaid]

The use of the example was only to establish that isolated incidents are not indicative of a pervasiveness of sentiments similar to that of the pre-civil rights era in the United States as was claimed above rather than assessment of the behavior itself. It's quite apparent that these incidents do not speak to United States public policy nor the sentiments of public of which was implied in claiming that the United States was reverting to a pre-Civil Rights era.

I personally know those would vehemently react to this situation and other that would have averted attention to the driver, continued sitting in the seats and shrug it off, if not, have a good laugh. The driver is powerless is his opinions. Why give him the attention or authority? Why act as if his words were life-altering? Victimization is not the appropriate discourse. This couple, if they want to set a good example, should have not acted like victims. True victims of prejudice exists, loss of property ownership, marital rights, child custody, the list goes on and on. Mean words are not victimizing unless there is actual damage done to a person, such as libel and slander. It's these incidents of overreaction to minor discriminatory behavior that casts a negative perception of the gay community in general. And while, I do agree that the public should not believe that there is a sense of paper-thin sensibilities among the entirety of the LGBT community; it's these types of stories that project that sentiment.

 

[Mr. X]

True prejudice sounds awfully like legitimate rape.

 

[Entermaid]

First of all, I never used the term "true discrimination".

'True victims' was the term used. A victim is a person that endures a loss or harm of some type. Misquoting and using disparate terminology in which has nothing to do with the topic detracts from the discussion.

If you'd like to comment on the points made on my previous post feel free to do so.

 

[Mr. X]

And I did comment on your point.

Your point is that this case shouldn't matter because it doesn't meet your definition of prejudice.

 

[Entermaid]

That is frankly false, that is never stated in my posts...Not all discrimination results in a victim. This is discriminatory behavior, that doesn't result in a victim, as there was not harm or loss endured by the party in question. Again, please refer to the points explicitly made in the post please.

 

[Kanzler]

I dunno, the bus driver was still an *******, and they responded pretty darn appropriately against *******ish behaviour. Sure it doesn't mean much under the law, and to you I suppose, but it does matter to me and others yet. What kind of decent person talks like he did anyways? Anyways, why should gay = back of the bus? That's discrimination right there. And they are victims for having to deal with that. It's an injury to honour and the collective dignity of gay people, for he was treated unfairly because of the quality they all share. Identity is important. Maybe it's not worth punishing in your eyes, but it's an injury to me and injuries should be dealt with.

 

[Pikayosh]

I agree with blah no one should even have to deal with this as it is completely wrong in any manner nad any way you look at it it is discrimination.

 

[Entermaid]

They should have simply not moved though. The bus driver didn't have the authority to move them to the back of the bus for that reason, as he would have if the public policy afforded him that power as it had in the pre-civil rights era against Black Americans. They were not forced to move, and they certainty shouldn't have allow the words of one individual to have such a negative impact on their lives. LGBT people should be exhibiting more strength and resilience to unkind words. This is the mentality and example that should be offered for the youth and community at large. Discrimination will never be eradicated, though improving the resilience of derogatory words toward the LGBT community seems to be a much more effective approach. However, LGBT youth are mostly offered examples like this, and thus, learn that this is the appropriate reaction to derogatory words.

If it was a substantive matter of which affected the couples rights or did anything to harm them, then yes, it would be concerning and legal action would have certainly been an appropriate discourse since these issues cannot be averted. That is not the case here, the couple had the ability to ignore and take power away from the bus driver as his words would befall on deaf ears. Another note, the bus-driver may be a decent person, but might be ignorant and discriminatory due to his socialization. For all we know, he volunteers his time to and money for charity and engages in other selfless acts. Homophobic people are not all terrible, especially taking into account the elderly population that have been programmed to think a certain way. For business, the actions he made are unconscionable, they affect sales and reputation, which is why I am surprised the company didn't take more forceful action. Though, they did instate sensitivity training which will most likely address this specific issue in the future. Though, again, we are educating gay youth to think that all homophobic people are terrible and inhumane. Rather, we need to be level-headed and teach the youth that these people are simply ignorant and have learned this misbehavior. Further, it creates a very combative relationship with LGBT people with anyone who is against any given LGBT right's issue. Though, yes, there should be a push to argue and stand up for rights, the opposition party should not be viewed as the enemy, it only creates more tension between the groups.

It's easy to see this story and feel sorry for the couple, especially given my own sexuality, for that reason I am trying to view it more objectively. Making a high-visibility civil litigation case out of each act of discrimination is not a viable solution for addressing discrimination in the LGBT community in some instances such as this one.