Sleeveless Top, No Service

As I reported five days ago, stores in Williamsburg, Brooklyn have posted signs warning customers not to try to enter if dressed 'immodestly' in sleeveless and/or low cut tops. So? What's new?

The Williamsburg dress code sign I posted on July 17

So. What's new?

What's new is that the New York Post clearly saw the sign I posted five days ago and set out to write a story about it – which is a good thing.

The bad thing is that the Post reporter stole the story from FailedMessiah.com and failed to credit me for reporting it first.

This same Post reporter tried to steal the Howard Frank suicide/murder story from me, as well, a couple weeks ago. (So far his report has not run in the Post. It was supposed to printed last Sunday, but wasn't. And then it was supposed to printed today. But as of a few minutes ago, it hadn't been.)

At any rate, the Post characterizes the sign (which it does not reproduce) this way:

Ultra-Orthodox Jewish business owners are lashing out at customers at dozens of stores in Williamsburg, trying to ban sleeveless tops and plunging necklines from their aisles. It’s only the latest example of the Hasidic community trying to enforce their strict religious laws for everyone who lives near their New York enclave.

“No Shorts, No Barefoot, No Sleeveless, No Low Cut Neckline Allowed in the Store,” declare the English/Spanish signs that appear in stores throughout the Hasidic section of the hipster haven. The retailers do not just serve Jews — they include stores for hardware, clothes and electronics.…

The Post's reporter then goes on to compare the sign to, among other things, the attempt by hasidim to force gender segregation on the B 110 city bus that serves the area.

Related Post: Williamsburg Grocery Store Dress Code.

[Hat Tip: Ruthie.]

Comments

[Garnel Ironheart]

> The bad thing is that the Post reporter stole the story from FailedMessiah.com and failed to credit me for reporting it first.

This seems to happen to you a lot.

At any rate, once again it's a private store. They can post whatever they want. You don't have to shop there. It's not like a public bus where everyone has to use it.

[norm]

How about a a store which posts a sign saying "No Hats, No Service!"

[David]

What they are REALLY busting to say is "Goyim and secular Jews not admitted". In time, they will.

[Mike]

The New York Post, who else?

[Eli, what me messiah?]

Shmarya, it's just Old Media being out scooped by legitimate New Media.
Badge of Honor. Probably means they recognize you're a competitive threat in reporting these matters and they worry about losing more readers to you.

[SkepticalYid]

Posted by: Garnel Ironheart | July 22, 2012 at 05:23 AM

No, they can't post whatever they want. If that were the case, a store could post a sign saying "No Jews," or "No Hispanics" allowed. They are a place of public accommodation and have to respect the law. That being said, they are allowed to require footwear and shirts.

[Bary]

Mike, we can always count on the New York Post to jump on any anti-Jewish story. New York City's own anti-Semetic newspaper.

[rebbeca]

"New York City's own anti-Semetic newspaper"
that title belongs to Shmarya's FM.

[Maskil]

Is it still legal in Williamsburg to have separate restrooms for men and women? Is it legal to write on the door: "Entrance Permitted to Men Only?"

[Maskil]

What they are REALLY busting to say is "Goyim and secular Jews not admitted". In time, they will.

Posted by: David | July 22, 2012 at 06:08 AM

Tisk, tisk, David. No Jew with a breath of life in him will ever turn away a paying customer. You know better than that.

[R. Wisler]

"Bary"....

It's "anti-Semitic", NOT "anti-Semetic". Perhaps if you had attended a legitimate school, or had a legitimate job, you'd know how to spel.

[NotJoel]

Sleeveless? I thought this was about circumcision bans. Circumcision ban has better intention than these bullshit modesty bans.

[Flatbush Girl]

Shmarya, it's terrible they don't credit you. Unfortunately, it happens to bloggers all over. WPIX Ch 11 is always taking stories from the blog for the neighborhood I live in, and rarely, if ever, credits the blogger. It's lazy journalism.

[Lo K'darkah]

What is sad is that they could achieve the same objective (rightly or wrongly) with a much more intelligent and respectful sign:

Dear Customers,

Our store services a unique community.
In order to avoid causing offence to other customers please ensure you are dressed modestly.
What may seem appropriate dress to you, especially in this hot weather, may inadvertently cause offence to others, so while we value your personal choices, and recognize your right to shop elsewhere, please respect our dress code (as outlined below) whilst on our premises. If you have any questions, the management will be happy to explain.
We apologize for any inconvenience this may cause, and hope you have a great day.

[WoolSilkCotton, rock star and sports superstar]

The stores on and around Lee Ave have few if any Hispanic or nonJewish customers. I assume this is the work of a few uber-fanatics who work at a couple of stores.

The last time I was on Lee Ave a few weeks ago, there were only one or two stores with such a sign, and there weren't that many customers in them anyway.

[adam hasheni]

This complaint rings extremely hollow coming from a blogger who regularly copies and pastes entire articles into his posts.

[Flatbush Girl]

"This complaint rings extremely hollow coming from a blogger who regularly copies and pastes entire articles into his posts."
Posted by: adam hasheni

Shmarya always credits the source.

[Maskil]

Lo K'darkah,

I was a lad and I have also aged, yet I have not met a Jew who can explain the *practical* applications of "modest" attire, let alone one who would be happy to do so. That's why you don't find a sign like that.

WSC,

The sign is not for the workers, it is to assuage prudish customers from the haredi sector. The point is to keep as many paying clients as possible.

[Eli, what me messiah?]

This complaint rings extremely hollow coming from a blogger who regularly copies and pastes entire articles into his posts.
Posted by: adam hasheni | July 22, 2012 at 08:52 AM

The issue is attribution. And your point is?

[SkepticalYid]

Posted by: Maskil | July 22, 2012 at 09:02 AM
Most likely it's a requirement imposed by their certifying Rabbi or Vaad. In any event, as long as it's legal (which is possibly the case), it's nobody's concern but their own. If a restaurant can require formal dress, the store probably can require long sleeves and full length pants.

[seymour]

comparing it to the bus issue is really a none starter si9nce one is public and one is private

neither, is the case of no Jews signs.

I still think a great money makes would be glasses to filter out immodest images

[WoolSilkCotton, rock star and sports superstar]

"...it is to assuage prudish customers from the haredi sector..."

Maskil, that is a good point. There are few, if any, Hispanic or nonfrum customers.
The sign is there to score points with the uber-frum.

[Res Sox Fan]

The print version of the NY Post has a close up of the sign.

[grandpa]

It's "anti-Semitic", NOT "anti-Semetic". Perhaps if you had attended a legitimate school, or had a legitimate job, you'd know how to spel.

Posted by: R. Wisler | July 22, 2012 at 08:12 AM

doesn't spel have 2 l's? spell

[Kavod]

Shmarya
I am disappointed
I thought that you were a pnimi ,that you were doing all this lishna Bisha,le shem shamayim!
you are here for your pursuing kavod,money
So ,get our from the basement ,go to work,make your own business and make millions of dollars

[grandpa]

Look they are selling pies and escotadas there. Does anyone know if the place is kosher and do they also have taco's and tortillas

[Chief Hole-in-the-Sheet]

Hey, SR's original post has a hat tip to HeatherHasid. So maybe HeatherHasid also tipped off the NY Post. Anyway, it seems SR suffers from DAGC. (That's David And Goliath Complex, he being David of course.)

[Steven k]

The post against the editorial in Ami was first published by Tzig in the Circus Tent blog, yet Shmarya did not attribute it.

[Lo K'darkah]

Alternatively (see first offering above)... thought of another two, couldn’t work out which one:

Dear Customers,
Due to sanity's commitments elsewhere, this store is run by a collective mindset still of the 18th century (which it believes to have been a time of higher public morality).
It is the policy of this store’s management to protect the spiritual, as well as physical, safety of its employees. As such, it believes: that the exposure of female skin gives rise to lewd and erotic thoughts in people that may lead them and others to sin; and that any encounter between an inappropriately attired female customer and a young male employee of the store risks an unacceptable level of cultural assimilation. Their ancestors worked hard for this seed, and they don’t want it wasted.

Dear Customers,
You wouldn’t turn up at a black tie event in swimwear and not expect the possibility of refusal of admittance.
The dress code of this store is based on Jewish Law, and a Rabbi comes regularly to inspect it. It’s like a sort of ‘visual kosher’ certificate.
We do this because we have a vast range of customers, but they all know that this is a store in which they will never see anything they do not want to see.
Jewish law believes women should respect their bodies - not only by free expression, but also by concealing its visual presentation from the male gaze. Jewish law expects women to be the model of visual modesty, so that men may learn from them the concept’s inner meaning, and that women are not seen as bodies.
Please respect the store, its management and staff, and their sensitivities.

[Yochanan Lavie]

Apologies to Kenny Chesney:

I've been up to my neck learnin' 6 days a week.
Wearin' holes in my soul sitting by the Rebbe's feet
Been dreamin' of Gittel, oy vey, since I don't know.
Ain't no shidduch now...cold as an Eskimo

Chorus:
No shoes, no sleeves, big problems
Jews what Jews? Nu, I forgot 'em
The sun and the Sanz and kiddish in my hand with no bottom,
and no shoes, no sleeves, big problems,
Big problems

Wear a tallis in my chair in the shul in Willy B.
Want to look thru my sefer and learn it for free.
Want to soak up life for a while
in ultra frum mode.
No goy, no Glock, no "Spics," Polish dress code.

chorus

Abe, let's get packed: streimel and gartel if you got 'em,
No shoes, no sleeves, big problems
Big problems.

[Eli, what me messiah?]

LK, YL, you guys think playing the Catskills this summer?
Thanks for the fun on a lazy day.

[my 2 cents]

Reminds me of the signs -- "no dogs, no jews"

Very ironic. People who want equal rights and enjoy democracy, but don't really understand that equality is extended to all.

It's really sad.

[Yochanan Lavie]

Eli, We're opening for Lenny Bruce.

[Lo K'darkah]

Very good YL. One of your best...

[SkepticalYid]

Yochanan, that was a masterpiece. Well done, sir!

[Yochanan Lavie]

Thanks, LKD, SY.

[moshe]

let us boycott the post and ny times stealing from failed messiah is not nice

[John Haman]

Reminds me of the signs -- "no dogs, no jews"

Very ironic. People who want equal rights and enjoy democracy, but don't really understand that equality is extended to all.

It's really sad.

Posted by: my 2 cents | July 22, 2012 at 11:10 AM

Couldn't agree more. to second that, it is one of the big confusions that the frum dont seem to grasp. You cant have your cake and eat it too. They want equality when it comes to grants and public funds but not only will they not assimilate they will discriminate against people not excactly like them and then call you an antisemite when you call them out. If you want to live like a neanderthal in the 21st century that is your right, however when you start using the public system to your benefit you have to treat the public hwo you want to be treated and learn to live and let live. Hasidim want all the government money and protection but when it comes to acting like citizens they say mind your business it is a free country. No wonder the surounding non jews are antisemites wherever there is a high population of hasidim, i would be too. They think the world has to bow to thier every whim and if not you are an antisemite or better a "self hating jew" whatever that means. Its time we normal jews call out our selfish brothers and let the world know we dont agree with thier selfish ways. yes there still will be hate but it will be on a much smaller scale then the direction we are heading in now!!

[dh]

If these stores accept food stamps / EBT cards, don't they have an agreement with the govt about complying with federal laws? No shirt and no shoes is alright for health and safety reasons....but denying entrance because of failure to shroud in black violates that aggreement. If they want hair covered then even men with a headcovering need to wear a hairnet... over the beard too.

[Garnel Ironheart]

SkepticalYid, it's not the same thing. They are not discriminating based on race, gender, orientation, etc. Anyone dressed appropriately is welcome in the store. A restaurant can demand that men wear a suit to be served. A country club can demand you wear a certain outfit. So why not a private store?

[SkepticalYid]

Posted by: Garnel Ironheart | July 22, 2012 at 01:20 PM

A country club is not a place of public accommodation. they can discriminate on any basis. For example, Rush Limbaugh is a long time member of the Everglades club, notorious for denying Jews membership.

I have no idea if the same dress codes are legally allowed in both restaurants and stores. I tend to doubt it. It's one thing to say: no bare feet and no shirts. It's another to allow a subjective and biased assessment of what defines low cut blouses or shorts. That can easily be used to discriminate, particularly based on religious affiliation.

[Nigritude Ultramarine]

No rope escotada

No low-cut rope?

I think that should be No ropa escotada

No low-cut clothes.

[dh]

Thus illustrating WSC and maskil's point. They know their target audience doesn't speak Spanish.

[fg]

Its rediculous. This sign is a palight request to customers. There are no coseqences for shopping with shorts or sleevless

[WoolSilkCotton, rock star and sports superstar]

Last one out, please turn off the palight.

[larry]

Does not mention if they are referring to man or women. I wonder if that is done purposely. I as a man would love to test them out.

[Jake]

Nothing wrong with the sign.

Go to beach areas the stores have signs saying no bathing suits.

I prefer shopping without tits and ass showing.

And I am not a prude.

[David]

Like all things frumma the sign is too "in your face" and discourteous with the usual frumma lack of "please" and "thank you".

"Please" and "thank you" can go a long way and cost nothing to say.

Signs I have seen of this nature in e.g. beach area shops usually have the usual courtesies.

[Flatbush Girl]

This was just on WPIX Ch 11 on the 10:00 pm news I didn't catch the beginning of it so I don't know if they credited any source. I doubt it.

[Mike]

I prefer shopping without tits and ass showing.

Most people would prefer them showing (I know I do!) However in your case I prefer you keep yours hidden, I do have standards :)

[SkepticalYid]

Posted by: Jake | July 22, 2012 at 05:57 PM

I wholeheartedly agree. For the sake of all of us who might be shopping in your vicinity, please keep your tits and ass well concealed.

[flailed]

how quickly we forget.

NO JEWS!