I don't like it personally, but I fail to see what's controversial. It's a private business with rules. It's not very different from places requiring you to wear a tie. I can imagine some other establishment requiring you to bring a pet. A singles bar can require the opposite and exclude groups from entering. Part of the experience is socializing and I can see why some bars might want to have rules that cater to a specific audience.

If their rule was "no single men after 21:00" I could see that as a sex discrimination thing. But this is a perfectly reasonable rule, I don't like it or agree with it, but it's also entirely the business owner's right.

> describing his venue as an "inclusive and safe environment".

The dude literally talks about inclusiveness while answering questions about their new policy excluding people?

Amazing guerilla campaign that guy did for his bar.

What a knob. His logic is illogical, as anyone from any group can "mither" another group as easily as someone not with a group. Does he really expect that all groups will stay to themselves? He should look up what it means to be social, which is what people go to bars for in the first place.

The culture where I live seems to be very different. In the mid-afternoons and late evenings, going to the bar alone or otherwise, is very common. The intention and effect is to spark up conversation with others at the bar. This is very much the norm here in Toronto at least, and certainly seemed to be the case other places I have traveled. We do still consider it rude to "mither" people sitting at the tables. But if you're at the bar itself, unless you're wearing headphones or buried in a book, it is assumed you're there for the chatter.

We also have quiet lounges, where the intentions of this bar owner would easily be compatible.

Speaking of - the bar owner's policy indirectly excludes most travelers.

> Firstly, if someone on their own has a seizure or an accident with no-one with them "in a late night busy bar environment, it's an absolute nightmare for us to deal with".

How many seizures does this guy deal with?

Also why are his bartenders incapable of cutting off people who are too drunk? I don't know about the UK, but most/all US states require bartenders to not serve someone who is visibly intoxicated.

TIL the term "mither".

They'll change their tune soon enough when the coin slows down.

Myself and many I know go to pubs/bars alone, have a drink and talk with a complete stranger or just sit people watching while decompressing after a long week.

They should pair the solo drinkers by opening a joint tab instead of banning.

I smell opportunity to stick all the solo drinkers in a room together to mither each other.

Add a pool table, an arcade machine, a dart board, and dudes will be in there for hours.

So it appears to have trolled mainstream media as an effective guerrilla marketing by arbitrary discrimination to manufacture controversy. And a bar next door should have a "No gingers past 22:00" sign to poke fun at the stupidity of this if it were serious.

Might as well turn it into a member's only social club that requires a subscription and board approval to keep "the other" out if this were actually a serious, lame "short cut" policy.

An open society comes with burdens like maintaining security staff to deter and cease maladaptive behavioral outbursts of people individually in preference to trotting out mean, naive, footgun policies like "no blacks", "no singles", or "No men".

I don't know why people even drink alcohol at all anymore, considering we know that it is causes numerous cancers and also brain damage, not to mention unsafe roads while driving intoxicated.