MENU

Reason.com

Free Minds & Free Markets

Starbucks Will Host Anti-Racist Training Session at 8,000 Stores

But don't expect it to fix whatever happened in Philadelphia last week.

StarbucksJESSICA GRIFFIN/TNS/NewscomStarbucks is facing heavy criticism after the manager of a Philadelphia location called the cops on two black men who declined to leave the coffeeshop when asked. Police arrested them, though Starbucks declined to press charges and they were later released.

Protesters briefly shut the store down on Monday, chanting "Starbucks coffee is anti-black! A whole lot of racism, a whole lot of crap!" Starbucks CEO Kevin Johnson is currently in the middle of an apology tour, having appeared on Good Morning America, spoke with furious local politicians, and met with the arrested men. He also promised to implement implicit bias training so that Starbucks employees will be less inclined to discriminate against people of color. Indeed, Starbucks announced just moments ago that it would close 8,000 stores on May 29 in order to to conduct racial bias training.

It's quite possible that racism may have played a factor in the manager's unwise decision to call the cops. But the incident is complicated, and implicit bias training is unlikely to solve the problem.

According to press reports, the two men entered the Starbucks and asked for the key to the bathroom. But bathrooms at Starbucks are only for paying customers, and the two men hadn't ordered anything yet. Having been denied access to the toilet, they took a seat at a table, claiming that they were waiting for a friend to arrive before they ordered. The manager then asked them to leave. After they refused, she called the cops, who arrested them for trespassing.

They were trespassing. There is no inalienable right to sit in a Starbucks; if the manager asks you to leave, you should leave. Philadelphia Police Commissioner Richard Ross has drawn criticism for defending the officers who made the arrests, but the cops did what they were supposed to do, given the situation. The mistake was the decision to call the cops in the first place.

People routinely come into Starbucks, sit down, and wait for someone else to show up before ordering. I have done this dozens of times, and I have never once had a problem. The fact that such behavior so irked the manager in this specific case is what raises the possibility of racial bias.

I realize that it can be annoying for Starbucks employees, and for other customers, when people occupy valuable real estate inside a store for a long period of time without consuming, or paying for, a Starbucks product. The Starbucks locations I frequent are often filled way beyond capacity, with seemingly every seat taken by people who looks like they finished their coffee hours ago. Obviously, Starbucks is losing money if people are just sitting there for long stretches of time, using the wifi but not buying anything.

But that's a general defense of kicking people out of Starbucks when the place is busy, not a claim about what was happening here. Since we have only limitated video footage of the incident, we don't know how crowded the shop was, or even if it was crowded at all. It's perfectly plausible that in this case the policy was selectively enforced in a racist way.

That leads us to another problem: expecting implicit bias training to fix things. As Jack Glaser, a Berkeley professor of public policy, told CNN:

The bottom line is we don't know how to change the biases in a meaningful, lasting way, because they're...the way we think normally and they're based on years of exposure. So in the absence of being able to change them, we need to change the way people make decisions and the way that they act.

We may not even properly understand how to gauge such biases in the first place. The most famous tool for measuring subconscious racial animus—the Implicit Association Test (IAT)—has been thoroughly debunked as junk science. As New York magazine's Jesse Singal has written:

A pile of scholarly work, some of it published in top psychology journals and most of it ignored by the media, suggests that the IAT falls far short of the quality-control standards normally expected of psychological instruments. The IAT, this research suggests, is a noisy, unreliable measure that correlates far too weakly with any real-world outcomes to be used to predict individuals' behavior—even the test's creators have now admitted as such. The history of the test suggests it was released to the public and excitedly publicized long before it had been fully validated in the rigorous, careful way normally demanded by the field of psychology. In fact, there's a case to be made that Harvard shouldn't be administering the test in its current form, in light of its shortcomings and its potential to mislead people about their own biases. There's also a case to be made that the IAT went viral not for solid scientific reasons, but simply because it tells us such a simple, pat story about how racism works and can be fixed: that deep down, we're all a little—or a lot—racist, and that if we measure and study this individual-level racism enough, progress toward equality will ensue.

The company should make whatever changes to its policies or training programs that it sees fit. But there isn't a magic implicit-bias-training wand that will make this sort of conflict go away, and Starbucks will be disappointed if it expects otherwise.

Photo Credit: JESSICA GRIFFIN/TNS/Newscom

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  • Diane Reynolds (Paul.)||

    Jesus, Robby, you have a man standing at the starbucks counter with a megaphone and you couldn't bother with alt-text?

    Cancel my subscription.

  • Citizen X - #6||

    If you inspect the picture element, there is a hidden alt-text. It just says "Starbucks."

    Yeah, i don't get it either.

  • Diane Reynolds (Paul.)||

    "Inspect the element"? What am I, Steve Wozniak?

  • Citizen X - #6||

    You might be. How would i have any way of knowing?

  • Brandybuck||

    "Inspect the element" was my pick-up line in college.

  • Citizen X - #6||

    Because you drove a Honda Element?

  • Diane Reynolds (Paul.)||

    C-, it's clear SOMEONE hasn't had xer Starbucks today.

  • Citizen X - #6||

    Whatever, i was in a hurry.

  • Marcus Aurelius||

    My anaconda don't want none
    Unless you got buns hon

  • Shatterface||

    Wasn't it Tom Cruise's catchphrase in Magnolia?

  • BestUsedCarSales||

    Iowahawk did like 15 for this picture if you want some.

  • Citizen X - #6||

    "Coffee Shop Whitey is the new Cigar Store Indian"

    (snort)

  • BestUsedCarSales||

    Great, now you're a Hihnitator now too.

  • Citizen X - #6||

    (snicker)

  • Chipper Morning Baculum||

    Wipe the egg off your puss.

  • Nardz||

    Quarantine this man!

    (cowers)

    Nooooooooooooooooo!

  • Agammamon||

    You sell ised cars?

  • ||

    "I SAID, IT'S REALLY LOUD IN HERE!"

  • Chipper Morning Baculum||

    "I like my coffee the way I like my women! Without non-paying customers sitting around watching me consuming my purchase!"

  • TrickyVic (old school)||

    Kinky

  • ||

    "Saying No to Starbucks: Antifa and Mormon church ideologically aligned for the first time ever."

  • Mcgoo95||

    You would know

  • Red Rocks White Privilege||

    Dumbfuck Hihnsano sees drooling all the time. It's called a mirror.

  • Red Rocks White Privilege||

    Dumbfuck Hihnsano shrieks like a bitch when he can't get in the last word.

  • Red Rocks White Privilege||

    Dumbfuck Hihnsano is ass-blasted that he can't bully people unopposed.

  • Diane Reynolds (Paul.)||

    "Starbucks coffee is anti-black! A whole lot of racism, a whole lot of crap!"

    "Goddamnit that's a good chant..."

  • TGGeko||

    Black doesn't rhyme with crap though.

  • BestUsedCarSales||

    IT KIND OF DOES.

  • Vernon Depner||

    Is it Blacks or Blasck?

  • Eidde||

    "A whole latte racism"

    "Too mocha racial harassment"

    "Racism and, like, fifteen dollars will get you a cup of coffee"

  • Chipper Morning Baculum||

    What they should really be protesting is the fact that Starbucks over-roasts more than Greg Giraldo.

    [pours some coffee on the ground to pay respects]

  • Citizen X - #6||

    TOO SOON.

  • Shatterface||

    Starbucks coffee is anti-blap!

  • Citizen X - #6||

    I like my coffee like i like my unreasonably ejected arrestees - strong and black.

  • BestUsedCarSales||

    Was it any surprise that Starbucks is a bunch of racist crackers? Their newest big drink is called a flat white.

  • Citizen X - #6||

    That sounds like a description of an ass that would make Heroic Mulatto sad.

  • BestUsedCarSales||

    It should make all of us in this great nation sad.

  • Chipper Morning Baculum||

    HM is such a contrarian that he would disagree with that statement.

  • Citizen X - #6||

    The only objection to a badonk that principle would ever allow HM to make is that there is not enough junk in the trunk.

  • BestUsedCarSales||

    Up here is where the real conversations are happening.

  • Citizen X - #6||

    Like the great salons of Paris or Vienna, or London during the early days of the Royal Society.

  • Marcus Aurelius||

    Paris Hilton was also known as Flat White.

  • Chipper Morning Baculum||

    "I like my coffee the way I like my women. As far away from Philly as possible!" - Fist of Etiquette

  • John||

    If the two guys showed up and didn't order anything, the manager had a right to ask them to leave. If they didn't, then I can't blame the manager for calling the cops. What else was he supposed to do? They were trespassers at that point.

    I have no idea if that is what happened. No one seems to have any idea or have bothered to ask the manager for his side of the story. Even if everything they say is true and he did just decide to call the cops on some black guys for fun, why is it so hard for these retards to understand some guy managing another starbucks had nothing to do with it? These idiots take collective guilt to extremes that would make even the old Communists blush.

  • Diane Reynolds (Paul.)||

    If the two guys showed up and didn't order anything, the manager had a right to ask them to leave. If they didn't, then I can't blame the manager for calling the cops. What else was he supposed to do? They were trespassers at that point.

    Maybe... Starbucks though... I can't tell you how many times I sat in a Starbucks and didn't order anything, and 9/10ths of the store is hipsters writing their novel on their macbooks with an empty macchiato cup they ordered three hours before.

  • John||

    Just because they don't have to throw you out, doesn't mean they can't if they want to. Maybe the store was crowded and the two guys were taking chairs from paying customers? I can see where they would ask them to buy something or leave then but wouldn't care if they bought something when the store wasn't crowded.

    Who knows. I find it hard to believe that the store manager either makes a habit of calling the cops on any black people who come in and no one ever complained before now or that he just suddenly decided to do so for the first time here. I would be very surprised if the manager didn't have some reason to do it and that reason has nothing to do with race, even if it was a stupid reason.

  • Diane Reynolds (Paul.)||

    I don't follow these stories anymore... what was the race of the clerk that threw the two people out? And sexual orientation? Do we have any data on this? It's very hard to make a judgment until we know these details.

  • John||

    I assume the guy who called the cops was white, but who knows. And yeah, there is a million reasons he could have called the cops on the guy, some reasonable, some totally unreasonable and just him being an asshole. Most of those reasons have nothing to do with race. These assholes just assume it was about race because as BUCS notes below, Starbucks is an easy mark for getting paid.

  • colorblindkid||

    I know that the police sent out a black cop who claimed he gave the okay to arrest them, but who knows if that's true. Also, it's Philadelphia. How many racists work at Starbucks? I've never been to one not full of non-white employees and the few white ones have pink hair and #Resist tattoos.

    I honestly just don't care enough. The fact that this is national news is a fucking joke.

  • John||

    I agree.

  • target||

    I was in a subway, black lady behind the counter, a short white woman came in with a tall guy, in thug gear. He stands in line, she goes to the side. The manager lady asked out loud, "where did she go?, she didn't just go to our restroom" arguments ensue, between her telling us that these drug addicts going in the restroom, messing everything up, and leaving their used needles and everything. When they got her out of the restroom, the girl and the guy both decided to sit at a table, (hadn't ordered anything, were waiting on a friend) while the manager told them to get out of her store, "this is a place of business", before calling the cops. After a minute or two, they reluctantly leave, and the cops show up as we were getting in our car.

    I'm not saying these guys in starbucks are doing drugs, but the story bears striking similarity to what I saw, and race played no role in it.

  • TrickyVic (old school)||

    The no use the restroom unless a paying customer is big in NYC. It's a holdover from the days junkies were looking for a place to shoot up. I get the overzealous no customer no bathroom. Also seating can be a big problem in bigger cities so sometimes they are more serious about getting you out for not ordering.

    I don't know if race played an issue. May be true. But I do know that if you are asked to leave, don't, and the cops are called, they will usually ask you to leave again, and if not you get arrested. I would go out on the limb and suggest they were given an option to leave peacefully, but choose the hard way instead.

    The problem I see in a lot of this stuff is that some people think they have a right to veto the officer. I don't believe in licking the boot, but if your options are comply or get arrested. Complying is the best way to stay out of the handcuffs. If you are making a civil rights issue and want to walk out in cuffs, fine, go for it. It might lead to living in a better place. But taking a stand to sit at a Starbuck as a non-paying customer? No.

  • SQRLSY One||

    Hey wait a minute... About pooping and peeing on Starfuck's dime I mean...

    Have YOU ever tried to poop on a dime?!?! It's not worth the hassle, lemme tell ya!! VERY messy, it is!!! I don't know about YOU, but my ass is so fat, I can't even SCRATCH my ass very well, with a friggin' dime!!!!

  • ||

    It happens in coffee, as well as McDonalds bathrooms. Many places use keys for entry now due to the high use of people just walking in and using the bathroom to shoot up. I worked in a coffee shop in a downtown, in a large city.

  • Malvolio||

    I don't know why you assume that. From the video, I would say that the person calling the cops is an Asian female and spotting Asian females is pretty much my only social skill.

  • Thomas O.||

    It COULD be race was a factor. We'd probably have to hear from other customers about if the manager acted the same way and just as hastily when white people were similarly waiting without paying for something.

    I understand businesses do have rights to set policy, but if you're calling the cops on two black people waiting for a friend but you pay no mind to two white people loitering in the same way, that can really damage the reputation of the franchise your business is representing.

  • BestUsedCarSales||

    This is national news because of convenience, when what we're really seeing is just normal interactions of bullshit and fighting that happens in public places. But the news is particularly race sensitive and so this gets escalated.

    Also, Starbucks is a big company so they can probably get some money out of them.

  • John||

    Also, Starbucks is a big company so they can probably get some money out of them.

    As with most things involving the Left, this probably boils down to "fuck you pay me". It wouldn't surprise me if the whole thing was staged.

  • EscherEnigma||

    If the two guys showed up and didn't order anything, the manager had a right to ask them to leave.


    As this is reason, I suspect you won't find many (if any) commentators disagreeing with you. That said, the complaint (here) isn't that it was illegal, it's that it was quite possibly wrong.

    You know, that whole "criticize bad behavior without making it illegal" that y'all claim you support.

  • John||

    Starbucks doesn't owe you the right to sit in their store. If you are not buying anything, they have every right to kick you out and are not wrong for doing so. If it was the case that these guys were not buying anything and were just taking seats that could be used by paying customers, Starbucks was right to kick them out.

  • BestUsedCarSales||

    Do you believe there is no morality outside of the law?

  • John||

    There is lots of morality outside the law. But that doesn't make it immoral to ask someone to leave your property. To say that this was immoral is to say that Starbucks has some kind of a moral duty to let people sit in their stores. Do you believe they did? How? And if not, then how was asking them to leave immoral?

    You seem to really have a hard time understanding that just because you don't like something does not necessarily mean it is immoral. Let me ask you, do you believe there is any morality outside of your preferences?

  • BestUsedCarSales||

    But that doesn't make it immoral to ask someone to leave your property.

    Under no circumstances? What if the sole reason he made him leave was because he was black? I'm not saying they are doing that. I'm just asking if you think there are circumstance where the clerk may have overstepped?

  • Rhywun||

    What if the sole reason he made him leave was because he was black?

    In Philadelphia?! Yeah, right.

  • John||

    Under no circumstances? What if the sole reason he made him leave was because he was black? I'm not saying they are doing that. I'm just asking if you think there are circumstance where the clerk may have overstepped?

    Sure, but there is no evidence that is what happened here. If that is the case that they let white people loiter but not these guys because they are black, then Starbucks is wrong. But that is the entire question.

  • BestUsedCarSales||

    I'm just trying to understand what you're saying. To make it clear to me what your point is.

    I think overall this isn't really a Starbucks issue anyway, at any level it's the employee and maybe the manager that are the ones involved here.

  • John||

    BUCS

    Suppose it is the case that young black men make bad bar flies and allowing them to loiter hurts business but say cute white girls make good bar flies and allowing them to loiter is good for business. Does Starbucks have a moral obligation to hurt its own business in the name of racial equality? If so, why?

  • BestUsedCarSales||

    That's an interesting question.

    I think this ties in nicely to a statement made in the Stossel/Peterson video today. One comment Peterson made was that if someone is inherently non-violent there is no virtue in them not being violent. That is, if there is no temptation then there is no virtue. (This is also why I think Dajjal described him as neo-Nietzschean, though I am not familiar with Peterson.)

    So, in a case like this I do believe that there would be a moral reason not to do it (I'm not clear on what is meant by obligation here, if you mean like a God obliges someone to do that to be moral, then absolutely. Feel free to clarify that for me). That is, certain beliefs about how we treat one another is the moral decision. For racial equality, which is just a specific and stupid form the ideal of treating all people consistently.

    But I would also not be too offended by them making the decision to remove them. I've done similar things removing homeless from my store. We often fail to meet our better selves, and in this case it's a fairly benign reason for the decision.

  • John||

    But I would also not be too offended by them making the decision to remove them. I've done similar things removing homeless from my store. We often fail to meet our better selves, and in this case it's a fairly benign reason for the decision.

    Sure we often fail to meet our better selves. Worse than that, we more often try to meet our better selves by demanding other people sacrifice for our principles.

  • BestUsedCarSales||

    And I will 100% agree with you that this A) this is and should be outside the realm of legal force, and B) that there is no morality in being made to do something at gun point.

    The latter point, to go off topic, is why I hate when people act like they've done good because their taxes were used to do something they agree with. That's neutral morality and it absolves people of actually having to do good things.

  • commentguy||

    I don't know about morals, but I am pretty sure that businesses are barred by some civil rights act (or similar) from evicting customers on the basis of race, even if they can prove that blacks are bad for business.

  • cereal_shake||

    I'm just trying to understand what you're saying. To make it clear to me what your point is

    Looks more like you're trying to play gotcha

  • BestUsedCarSales||

    Nope. Not how I roll.

  • cereal_shake||

    Just telling you what it looks like.

  • BestUsedCarSales||

    I get that a lot.

  • cereal_shake||

    Maybe you should take that into consderation in the future.

  • ||

    It does come off as that.

    FFS, if you're not a paying customer, you're loitering and the store has every right to ask you to leave. If you decline, you're trespassing. It's a fricken lawn we all understand.

    Why does everything have to be so needlessly heavy with philosophical bull shit?

    There is no 'moral' angle to this. Lemme ask. If they did do something bad, say, hurt another paying customer and the manager had failed to ask them to leave....what then?

    Jesus Christ. Someone asks you to leave - LEAVE.

  • BestUsedCarSales||

    It does come off as that.

    I apologize, I am discussing in good faith and I do try to improve it so that it's clear that I am not arguing to fucking with people. I think I'm getting better, but the way I talk is definitely weird by most people's standards and it's a slow improvement on that for me. I am trying though.

    Why does everything have to be so needlessly heavy with philosophical bull shit?

    Because it's the kind of things I think about. The libertarian legal argument is straightforward. They can do what they want with their property. The legal libertarian solution is often straightforward. But outside there is a huge realm of right and wrong that is worth discussing.

    tl;dr I'm a navel gazing cunt.

  • ||

    No need to apologize.

    Look, I'm as humanist as the next guy but some things are just black and white.

    You can't loiter in some establishments. But as someone explained down thread, apparently SB is okay with that.

  • Sidd Finch v2.01||

    What if the sole reason he made him leave was because he was black? I'm not saying they are doing that. I'm just asking if you think there are circumstance where the clerk may have overstepped?

    These are such fucking asshole questions. "Please explain why you consider it moral to work for a company and do whatever the fuck you want?"

  • BestUsedCarSales||

    What do you mean?

  • Sidd Finch v2.01||

    You're a cunt.

  • BestUsedCarSales||

    Got it.

  • TuIpa||

    He's not wrong, they are asshole questions.

  • Mark22||

    Under no circumstances? What if the sole reason he made him leave was because he was black?

    What does "because he was black" even mean? Exactly how would a person make a decision simply "because he was black"?

  • Chipper Morning Baculum||

    Just because you have the right to do some thing does not make it right, John. You have the right to insult an old lady on the street, but it would not be the right thing to do.

  • John||

    Okay chipper, explain why this is wrong? Why is it wrong for Starbucks to demand you buy something in order to sit in their store? You guys seem to think that is automatically immoral. They run a business. How are they supposed to run a business if their paying customers can't find seats?

  • Chipper Morning Baculum||

    There were plenty of free seats. Also, Starbucks is a hangout place. If they discourage this and start policing who can stay, they will kill the atmosphere and people will patronize them less.

  • John||

    There were plenty of free seats. Also, Starbucks is a hangout place. If they discourage this and start policing who can stay, they will kill the atmosphere and people will patronize them less.

    That is what you think. But this manager sees it differently. I don't see how that makes him immoral. He just has a different view of what is best for his business. He might be wrong but being so doesn't make him immoral.

  • Chipper Morning Baculum||

    Fair enough, John. I agree with that. Although it seems as if the manager was acting against the company policy.

  • Red Rocks White Privilege||

    Dumbfuck Hihnsano loves pointless virtue signaling.

  • Sidd Finch v2.01||

    f they discourage this and start policing who can stay, they will kill the atmosphere and people will patronize them less.

    What happens when the homeless find out that that Starbucks let's anyone hang out and use the bathroom all day?

  • Chipper Morning Baculum||

    If the homeless stink up the place, then they are disturbing the other customers. Did these guys disturb the other customers?

  • Sidd Finch v2.01||

    So the manager should kick out some loiters based on arbitrary rules?

  • Chipper Morning Baculum||

    No.

  • cereal_shake||

    Did these guys disturb the other customers?

    . Seems like it, it's hard to think no one was disturbed by their behavior, even if they weren't being aggressive. I know a scene like this wouldn't bother me, but some dude refusing to leave and being arrested by the cops seems like it could disturb someone.

  • SQRLSY One||

    Hey wait a minute... About pooping and peeing on Starfuck's dime I mean...

    Have YOU ever tried to poop on a dime?!?! It's not worth the hassle, lemme tell ya!! VERY messy, it is!!! I don't know about YOU, but my ass is so fat, I can't even SCRATCH my ass very well, with a friggin' dime!!!!

  • cereal_shake||

    Or the place will be nicer and people will come in more. You seem to making the assumption that they don't police who can stay already, and that the " atmosphere" will be less desirable

  • ||

    You're wrong and John is right.

    Sometimes you guys don't even smell your own farts.

    What part of it's a place of business don't you guys get?

  • SQRLSY One||

    "Sometimes you guys don't even smell your own farts."

    Are you a smart feller or a fart smeller?!?!?

    Inquiring minds want to KNOW!!!

  • ||

    I'm definitely not the former.

  • Nardz||

    Sure.
    Conversely: just because someone was an ass doesn't automatically make the recipient a victim.
    I go to Starbucks to use WiFi and sit around from time to time. You know what I do? I buy a shitty small coffee for $2.50 and go about my business for an hour or two.
    I'm not going to just loiter and take advantage of their annoying ass establishment.
    We're trying to have a society here

  • Paper Wasp||

    We have no idea what the men were doing before the employee called the cops; they could have been disruptive. Is it moral to camp out on someone else's private property indefinitely, when you know damned well that private property is provided by the owner for the comfort and enjoyment of paying customers? No.

  • ||

    Starbucks doesn't owe you the right to sit in their store. If you are not buying anything, they have every right to kick you out and are not wrong for doing so. If it was the case that these guys were not buying anything and were just taking seats that could be used by paying customers, Starbucks was right to kick them out.

    Agreed. This is even more absurd that gay wedding cakes as homosexuals, at least generally, intend to patronize the bakers in good faith.

  • Thomas O.||

    What I believe it all boils down to: The issue does not lie with what rules a place of business sets, but rather with the selective enforcement of the rules.

    Sure, the Starbucks manager was going by the books in dealing with those two. But has she or would she have banished two white people or called the cops on them just as quickly? Hopefully we'll get all sides of this story soon.

  • damikesc||

    It's even worse that the company he was simply following the rules of threw him under the bus,

    Unless Starbucks has a sign out front saying "Dudes, come piss and shit in our toilets all you want. You ain't got to buy shit", then they are EXPECTING their employees to enforce THEIR rules.

    Nothing worse than a company demanding an employee enforce a rule and then throwing them under the bus when they do so.

  • John||

    You could not run a business in a big city like Philadelphia and allow anyone to use your bathroom. The bums would overrun you and run all of your customers off in the first morning.

  • SQRLSY One||

    Hey wait a minute... About pooping and peeing on Starfuck's dime I mean...

    Have YOU ever tried to poop on a dime?!?! It's not worth the hassle, lemme tell ya!! VERY messy, it is!!! I don't know about YOU, but my ass is so fat, I can't even SCRATCH my ass very well, with a friggin' dime!!!!

  • Thomas O.||

    WE HEARD YOU!

    /jimnorton

  • Rhywun||

    Pretty much. All Starbucks cares about is its image.

    It'll be interesting to see what happens now that they are going to have to allow any and all bums off the street to hang around all day. Maybe little homeless encampments?

  • John||

    Maybe little homeless encampments?

    Sure, why not. If they don't have to buy anything or leave when asked, why should they have to leave when the store closes? I am amazed that people on here can't see what is going on and the left's ultimate goal.

  • sharmota4zeb||

    I know what you mean. What's so bad about walking the around in Philadelphia during the day? It's not like going outside in a rural town at night when the wolves are roaming.

  • Ron||

    the question is how long were they there though legally there is no minimum time

  • damikesc||

    The store would be in its right to throw you out for sitting and not quickly getting up to buy something.

  • Brandybuck||

    Who's next for the two minutes of hate?

  • EscherEnigma||

    But there isn't a magic implicit-bias-training wand that will make this sort of conflict go away, and Starbucks will be disappointed if it expects otherwise.


    Is there any evidence that anyone realistically thinks it will?

    Just because something isn't a "magic wand" doesn't mean it can't help. If you want to criticize the training, that's what you need to argue against. Not that it's not a magic wand, but that it doesn't help.

  • Diane Reynolds (Paul.)||

    Is there any evidence that anyone realistically thinks it will?

    Yes, the entire industry that's created implicit-bias-training programs.

  • John||

    If Starbucks didn't think so, why are they paying for it?

  • BestUsedCarSales||

    To smooth over the bad press.

  • John||

    True but that is not what they are claiming.

  • BestUsedCarSales||

    Yes, and I'm saying they are saying something to the press and they don't actually believe it. They are just playing PR, and saying they are dealing with deep, underlying human psychology is a way to get better PR.

    That's indicative of what people want to here, moreso than probably any deep seated beliefs on Starbucks part. They probably do buy it a little, as they are a Seattle company, but I'm sure they have reservations.

  • Rhywun||

    They are just playing PR,

    I think that's what's most galling. Every single person in this story is being fake AF.

  • BestUsedCarSales||

    It's the game of the day.

  • Get To Da Chippah||

    Probably because saying that would lead to more bad press?

  • John||

    Why is that? Because a whole bunch of people think this training is real and works.

  • EscherEnigma||

    One part PR, one part (to quite myself) "Just because something isn't a "magic wand" doesn't mean it can't help."

  • Diane Reynolds (Paul.)||

    The other side of the coin that NO ONE seems to address is... what if the implicit-bias training programs actually hurt?

  • John||

    They absolutely hurt the situation.

  • EscherEnigma||

    To quote myself...

    If you want to criticize the training, that's what you need to argue against. Not that it's not a magic wand, but that it doesn't help.


    Hurting would be covered under "doesn't help".

  • Diane Reynolds (Paul.)||

    Fair enooff..

  • EscherEnigma||

    People paid to sell a product will of course (publicly) claim it'll slice, dice, and groom your poodle. That's why I added the "realistically" qualifier.

  • John||

    Where is the evidence that it is needed? Even if this happened as it is being portrayed, that is not evidence of any systematic problem or anything other than the actions of one person in one store in a company that has tens of thousands of stores. The training is absurd. If a manager of a Starbucks went berserk and murdered some customers, would every manager then need to be trained not to murder customers? By your logic they would be.

  • BestUsedCarSales||

    Really it's just them trying to smooth things over. I doubt this is even a meaningful systemic issue from Starbucks. But they can do some action, and try to make clear their policy to avoid bad press like this in the future.

  • Diane Reynolds (Paul.)||

    They have to do something, this is doing something. And Starbucks upper management is deeply entwined in the politics of woke. So, they made their beds, let them lie in it.

  • damikesc||

    Just because something isn't a "magic wand" doesn't mean it can't help.

    As a general rule, being pro-reeducation is going to be a bad stance pretty much every single time.

  • EscherEnigma||

    Your right. The idea that self awareness might help folks make better decisions is stupid. It's so much better to just suggest wood-chippering people.

  • cereal_shake||

    The idea that self awareness might help folks make better decisions is stupid

    But... he said that not buying in would be a problem, which your post really has nothing to do with. He never questioned increased self-awareness.

  • damikesc||

    Your right. The idea that self awareness might help folks make better decisions is stupid.

    This is not what they will be doing.

    We've seen plenty of these "diversity" training sessions which tend to consist of "You white folks suck something hard" and little else. It will generate major discontent amongst the staff with no real chance to improve things.

    But, yes, they might eventually grow to love Big Brother. And that is what is key.

  • Mark22||

    Just because something isn't a "magic wand" doesn't mean it can't help.

    Help with what exactly? Will implicit bias training of Starbucks managers reduce black crime rates? Black single motherhood rates? Black anger? Will making Starbucks managers afraid to call the police on blacks help anybody?

    Who do you think this helps, and how?

  • SQRLSY One||

    Starfucks policy from now on... If you want to "hang" all day, and poop and pee on THEIR dime, it's all OK...

    GIVEN that you are BLACK!!! How black do you have to be, though?

  • I can't even||

    I assume using their wifi to surf internet porn is included in that deal.

  • BestUsedCarSales||

    Your piss better be black if you're leaving it around.

  • Chipper Morning Baculum||

    If you can use the n-word, you can hang at Starbucks without patronizing.

  • TuIpa||

    Why do you continue to insist on proving that you're an idiot?

    We get it, you're a racialist.

  • Paper Wasp||

    So now Starbucks will turn into the central branch of every city's public library. It will stink of unwashed homeless druggie, and forget about using the bathroom because somebody's busy shooting up in there.

    Filed under "be careful what you ask for, you just might get it."

  • SQRLSY One||

    Hey wait a minute... About pooping and peeing on Starfuck's dime I mean...

    Have YOU ever tried to poop on a dime?!?! It's not worth the hassle, lemme tell ya!! VERY messy, it is!!! I don't know about YOU, but my ass is so fat, I can't even SCRATCH my ass very well, with a friggin' dime!!!!

  • buybuydandavis||

    One drop rule?

    How are transracial blacks handled?

  • Hank Phillips||

    Starbucks must be really worried about recreational coca being taken off the Avatars of Satan schedule if the LP keeps growing.

  • ||

    This is more of the left eating itself. Let's hope it continues unabated...

  • John||

    At some point, people are going to realize that there is no way to placate these people. It doesn't matter how woke you are and how much you grovel. They will eventually turn on you and you're being a longstanding loyal member of the party is not going to save you. The only way to deal with these people is to tell them to fuck off from the very beginning.

  • damikesc||

    Which is why, if I were a CEO, I would NEVER apologize to proggie mobs.

    It never seems to be helpful. It just encourages them to be angrier.

    Just a simple "Next time, buy something first or wait outside for your buddy before loitering here for 15 minutes" would be sufficient.

  • John||

    One thing about the proggie mobs is that they generally have a short attention span. You don't have to hold out very long before they find a new target and move on somewhere else.

  • Ron||

    When you stand up to them like Chik-fil lay or hobby lobby they go away pretty quick because they know they can't make a show or even get ransom

  • Chipper Jones||

    This is really key and why Zuckerberg stuck with little more than "yes, sir" and "yes, ma'am" at his hearings, even though it would have been easy to tell them all to fuck off. Just let the idiots talk themselves into a tizzy until they find a new target.

  • rudehost||

    Which is entirely consistent with what he said. Being civil and ostensibly helpful to proggie mouth breathers until the retards go off after some other shiny object is a plausible way to protect your business.

  • damikesc||

    I want to host a seminar for CEO titled:

    NOBODY REALLY GIVES A FUCK WHAT TWITTER MOBS THINK

    They seem to think that most people follow Twitter, much less give two shits about what the Twitter mob du jour is irate about.

  • Red Rocks White Privilege||

    Dumbfuck Hihnsano describes his social circle.

  • Red Rocks White Privilege||

    Dumbfuck Hihnsano shrieks like a bitch when he can't get in the last word.

  • Red Rocks White Privilege||

    Dumbfuck Hihnsano is ass-blasted that he can't bully people unopposed. That's why he thinks he's like a Holocaust victim.

  • Red Rocks White Privilege||

    Dumbfuck Hihnsano plugs his copypasta to hide his pointless buffoonery.

  • rudehost||

    I really believe it's an emperor's clothes situation. You need some high profile target to be attacked for something absurd. Then you need that target to tell them to fuck off. When nothing bad happens the proggie mob will be exposed as paper tigers. They only have power because people with actual power like the ones who can fire people fear them. They are basically a less reasonable version of Joe McCarthy and that is tough to pull off.

  • damikesc||

    I'd hesitate to insult McCarthy with comparisons to Twitter mobs. At least there were Communists in the government, per his requests.

    Twitter is just blindly thrashing at anybody who angers them that moment. That the name "Justine Sacco" is known by anybody outside of her immediate circle of friends is tragic and all thanks to Gawker and Twitter.

  • Red Rocks White Privilege||

    Dumbfuck Hihnsano pretends he knows how Twitter works.

  • Red Rocks White Privilege||

    Dumbfuck Hihnsano shrieks like a bitch when he can't get in the last word.

  • Nardz||

    Who's down to get an activist group going whose mission statement is to harass companies that cave to activist groups?

    Let's get meta in this bitch

  • buybuydandavis||

    Never apologize

    Your apology is the rope they will hang you with

  • TrickyVic (old school)||

    Probably smaller than yours.

  • Red Rocks White Privilege||

    Dumbfuck Hihnsano thinks ranting in boldface at a computer monitor is crashing a safe space.

  • Red Rocks White Privilege||

    Dumbfuck Hihnsano shrieks like a bitch when he can't get in the last word.

  • Red Rocks White Privilege||

    I'm more surprised that this is appears to be their first documented effort at conducting struggle sessions.

  • Diane Reynolds (Paul.)||

    Douglass Murray: "I'm struggling in front of this Israeli!" *shakes arms in the air*

  • colorblindkid||

    Do you know how many times I've been told I can't use the bathroom without buying something?

  • BestUsedCarSales||

    But you never listened. You never GAVE IN MAN.

  • Chipper Morning Baculum||

    I have never been told this.

  • Rhywun||

    Me neither but then I have never presumed. And I pretty frequently see signs saying that the bathrooms are for customers only.

  • SQRLSY One||

    Hey wait a minute... About pooping and peeing on Starfuck's dime I mean...

    Have YOU ever tried to poop on a dime?!?! It's not worth the hassle, lemme tell ya!! VERY messy, it is!!! I don't know about YOU, but my ass is so fat, I can't even SCRATCH my ass very well, with a friggin' dime!!!!

  • cereal_shake||

    Go to any store in downtown Savannah.

  • Jerryskids||

    When I get told that, I just look them in the eye and get a dopey grin and say "Too late, I don't need to use the bathroom any more."

  • $park¥ leftist poser||

    Starbucks coffee is anti-black!

    To be fair, nobody drinks black coffee anymore.

  • John||

    Cafe Ole is racist. Didn't you know that?

  • BestUsedCarSales||

    I sometimes do.

  • $park¥ leftist poser||

    I SAID NOBODY!

  • ||

    I sometimes do.

    Always with pie. Otherwise, just have a glass of milk and coffee later.

    There's a pie called 'Sugar Cream Pie'. it's actually 'Hoosier Sugar Cream Pie' but it's generally not served outside Indiana and nobody in Indiana calls it that. It's like one of their fancy whipped drinks deconstructed into coffee and pie. Cream in your coffee would be redundant.

  • Nardz||

    You gotta love stories where there are no good guys, nor really bad guys (arguable), but only idiots everywhere.

    The loiterers: Whether or not the store was busy, I'm going to hazard the guess - based upon the manager's reaction and subsequent events - that these guys were less than polite when denied bathroom access and asked to purchase something.
    The manager: Probably inexperienced and/or b*tchy in general, overstepped civility and pulled a quick trigger. Poor management skills, but fundamentally not unreasonable concerns.
    Cops: They had to be cuffed? Really? Did they even try telling the guys to leave before doing so? I'm not that deferential to authority, but I'm not going to make cops cuff me before leaving when ordered...
    Protestors: Just STFU.
    Starbucks: Way to cave. Great example you've set. Have some self-respect. Bad PR? Sure. But get out and tell your side of the story. At some point, somebody is going to have to stand up to rampant PC terrorism.

  • Diane Reynolds (Paul.)||

    Cops: They had to be cuffed? Really? Did they even try telling the guys to leave before doing so? I'm not that deferential to authority, but I'm not going to make cops cuff me before leaving when ordered...

    I agree with everything you say, but I suspect that by the time it had gotten to this place, certain lines had been drawn and, let's face it, in today's hyper-sensitive climate, the race angle was now firmly in play and getting arrested is the short path to a big payout after a long and protracted twitter brawl, followed by a totally predictable "apology tour" by the CEO.

    I mean, we're talking endorsement deals, tv shows, interviews. You don't let an opportunity like this pass by.

  • TrickyVic (old school)||

    Police procedure > your rights or civility.

  • John||

    I can't blame the manager if it was the case they were just pissed about having to buy something to use the bathroom. The cops do seem to have overreacted. Why arrest the guys? Just tell them to get out and end the situation. It looks to me like the cops as usual made the situation worse and not better.

    Ultimately, if what you say is true, and it is a pretty reasonable guess at what happened, the loiterers bare the biggest share of the blame. They have no right to demand to use someone's bathroom and squat on the property when they are refused. And while the cops overreacted, they no doubt were total assholes and contributed to that happening. Yes, cops shouldn't be assholes but that doesn't make these guys any smarter for giving them an excuse to be so.

    I guess my question for the people who are on the loiterers' side here is where does this end? If they should be able to walk in and use Starbucks' bathroom and sit on their property without buying anything or the manager wanting them to be there, whose other property can they do that on?

  • Mark22||

    Why arrest the guys?

    Apparently they still refused to leave repeatedly when the police asked them to leave.

  • Sidd Finch v2.01||

    I'm pretty sure the commissioner said the cops asked the guys to leave several times before cuffing them.

  • EscherEnigma||

    And you believe them? "Pics or it didn't happen" isn't a meme when it comes to cops, it's the only way left to keep them (somewhat) honest.

  • Sidd Finch v2.01||

    How honest are young black men?

  • Enjoy Every Sandwich||

    As far as Starbucks goes, haven't any of them seen Beverly Hills Cop? If they had they'd know how this scam works.

  • Ron||

    they claimed to need the bathroom, when denied access without a purchase then they didn't buy anything but sat down you know they are up to no good at that point. even if they were waiting for a friend they could have bought something proving their initial need was BS.

    those are the type of people you ask to leave no matter what color they are

  • SQRLSY One||

    Hey wait a minute... About pooping and peeing on Starfuck's dime I mean...

    Have YOU ever tried to poop on a dime?!?! It's not worth the hassle, lemme tell ya!! VERY messy, it is!!! I don't know about YOU, but my ass is so fat, I can't even SCRATCH my ass very well, with a friggin' dime!!!!

  • The Laissez-Ferret||

    I guess that video that's been circulating on Facebook for the last 24 hours is of another Philly Starbucks where two black guys are arrested for loitering. Must happen a lot there...

  • damikesc||

    If it was empty, it would be irrelevant.

  • Red Rocks White Privilege||

    Dumbfuck Hihnsano empty-quoting his own stupidity again.

  • Red Rocks White Privilege||

    Dumbfuck Hihnsano shrieks like a bitch when he can't get in the last word.

  • Azathoth!!||

    There are actually at least two videos that I have seen.

  • Rhywun||

    It's perfectly plausible that in this case the policy was selectively enforced in a racist way.

    And this matters... why? It should be their right to kick out anyone they don't want hanging around. Period.

  • John||

    Suppose it is the case that young black men make bad bar flies and allowing them to loiter hurts business but say cute white girls make good bar flies and allowing them to loiter is good for business. Does Starbucks have a moral obligation to hurt its own business in the name of racial equality? I don't see why. But I would be curious to hear the various pearl clutchers on here explain why they do.

  • The Last American Hero||

    What if the young black men choose to identify as white women?

  • John||

    If they could pass, then they could stay.

  • Paper Wasp||

    Yeah, not sure I'd let them stay either.

  • Red Rocks White Privilege||

    Fortunately, Dumbfuck Hihnsano can identify as an adult, but never argue like one.

  • Red Rocks White Privilege||

    Dumbfuck Hihnsano shrieks like a bitch when he can't get in the last word.

  • Sidd Finch v2.01||

    There's probably at least one blog post about a bar with one of those "no dreadlocks, no sagging pants, no uhhh ... gold chains wink wink" dress codes.

  • John||

    I give you a better one than that. One of the biggest complaints gay men give about gay bars is they are overrun with fag hags. If I run a gay bar, why can't I kick out straight women because they make bad bar flies and hurt my business? If gay bars can kick out people based on their sex and sexual orientation, why can't coffee shops discriminate based on race?

  • EscherEnigma||

    They can't, and because the CRA (1964).

  • Sidd Finch v2.01||

    You made this comment knowing John is a lawyer. What is wrong with you?

  • John||

    Technically they cannot. But you can do anything just so long as you don't get sued. I am sure some do. But the point is why shouldn't they?

  • Rhywun||

    I think the answer for both is the same: should be legal but you'd be stupid to do it. That goes for gay bars too - I've heard that complaint now and then but it's not the biggest complaint in my experience. Then again I've never been anywhere that could conceivably be characterized as "overrun" with them.

  • John||

    I speak with no authority when it comes to gay bars. So, my example is strictly hypothetical.

  • sharmota4zeb||

    A strip club with female strippers in the county north of mine will not allow unaccompanied women in. Maybe the strip club worries about single ladies taking their customers away.

  • Mark22||

    One of the biggest complaints gay men give about gay bars is they are overrun with fag hags.

    I think there's something wrong with your premise. Fag hags are needed for lonely gay men to cry their hearts out to and to commiserate about how evil men are; fag hags are as important to gay bars as condom dispensers and hunky bartenders.

  • $park¥ leftist poser||

    It should be their right to kick out anyone they don't want hanging around. Period.

    Damn straight.

  • Pat001||

    Time to rev up the "Let's Talk About Race" program again?

  • Rhywun||

    I would think this one would get drowned out by the other fifty national conversations about race we're having. OTOH this one does have Starbucks so it seems to be clawing its way to the top.

  • I can't even||

    Let's put a libertarian spin on it and discuss which races want less government!

  • damikesc||

    Hmm, an apology tour. That certainly seems to work well when facing a prog mob.

  • Cynical Asshole||

    "Starbucks coffee is anti-black!

    It must be all the cream and sugar that they put in their cappuccinos and frappuccinos.

    Maybe they should offer a new drink and call it the "Kriegerccino."

  • The Last American Hero||

    The collective guilt is the real problem here. If the store manager misbehaved, or is just causing the employer bad press and headaches, fire him. If a store manager is known to cop a feel on female employees, you fire him. The other 7,999 adults that work there don't need a half hour lecture on keeping your hands off the boobies. If a barista comes to work with feces spread all over her apron, you fire her. You don't call a meeting for the other 7,998 adults reminding them not to spread poo poo on their apron.

    They pull this crap on the right from time to time. Some douchebag McDonalds manager refuses to serve lunch to a cop. All you have to do is fire the manager. It's not like McD's has a policy not serving to cops. The manager was not acting in accordance with company policy.

  • Rhywun||

    The media is the problem here. They are the ones that blew this into a national story for no fucking reason whatsoever.

  • John||

    The media is the problem here.

    If there is a "safe bet hall of fame", that phrase should be in it.

  • Rhywun||

    The media is the problem here. They are the ones that blew this into a national story for no fucking reason whatsoever.

  • Diane Reynolds (Paul.)||

    The media is the problem here. They are the ones that blew this into a national story for no fucking reason whatsoever.

    Uhh, there's a reason.

  • Cynical Asshole||

    If the store manager misbehaved, or is just causing the employer bad press and headaches, fire him.

    FTA:

    After they refused, she called the cops...

    The manager was a woman, so they can't fire her because then they'd be sexist as well as racist.

  • BestUsedCarSales||

    Completely agree. If any wrong has been committed, and it is not clear to me there is, then it's not systemic regardless. Which seems to be a too frequent claim of the day.

  • ||

    All you have to do is fire the manager. It's not like McD's has a policy not serving to cops. The manager was not acting in accordance with company policy.

    One rather big caveat is that McDonalds is more widely franchised than Starbucks. I don't know for sure, but McD's likely has a policy regarding serving law enforcement and barring verbal abuse or assault as part of the franchise agreement, it likely doesn't call for a dismissal or revoking of franchise rights on the "first offense" but generally does allow franchisees and their managers more leeway. However, Starbucks apparently, does not have a policy.

  • ||

    Derp. "...McD's likely has a policy regarding serving law enforcement as part of the franchise agreement and barring verbal abuse or assault, it likely..."

  • Cynical Asshole||

    People routinely come into Starbucks, sit down, and wait for someone else to show up before ordering. I have done this dozens of times, and I have never once had a problem. The fact that such behavior so irked the manager in this specific case is what raises the possibility of racial bias.

    Is that really all that happened here though, or did the two men curse at, threaten, or otherwise get "mouthy" with the manager, so much so that she felt she had no choice but to call the cops? If they were refusing to leave and being belligerent about it, then I'm not sure what else the manager could have done about it, regardless of their skin color.

    Of course, I'm probably a "racist" for even suggesting that could have been a possibility.

    Since we have only limitated video footage of the incident

    A link to the video would be nice, it might even answer my question above.

  • John||

    Just exactly what is a woman supposed to do when two young males of any race tell her to fuck off?

  • Cynical Asshole||

    Submissively walk her ass back to the kitchen, apparently.

    And maybe see about making them a sammich. On the house, natch.

  • Ron||

    I think the mannager who has now been fired may have a case against starbucks her self. something along the lines of improper firing for doing her job maybe someone here can think of something but this story like a lot of these racist stories there are a lot of unknowns and those unknowns seem to have been kept out of the public eye by people who don't want the whole story to be known

  • Fist of Etiquette||

    Forget the alt-text, I'm going to need scare quotes around furious in ...spoke with furious local politicians, and met with the arrested men.

  • ||

    There is no inalienable right to sit in a Starbucks; if the manager asks you to leave, you should leave.

    Or, you know, do like Americans have done for decades and cough up the $1 and change required to purchase a cup of coffee.

  • Diane Reynolds (Paul.)||

    $1 and change required to purchase a cup of coffee.

    This is what's wrong with America. It should cost 50 cents.

  • ||

    This is what's wrong with America. It should cost 50 cents.

    I blame Seattle. I'm not sure where you are but you'd be hard pressed to get vending machine coffee for $0.50.

  • Diane Reynolds (Paul.)||

    Probably because you're buying the good stuff like Folgers.

  • $park¥ leftist poser||

    This is Starbucks, their $1 coffee costs $6.50.

  • Enjoy Every Sandwich||

    I was taught by my parents that it's rude to hang out in somebody's business without conducting any business, and if the owner/manager asks you to leave you just do it. It's ridiculous how so many situations that used to be handled by simple rules of courtesy now have to be adjudicated by the government. Stuff like loitering, public smoking, breast feeding babies, etc. could usually be handled peacefully by adults, once upon a time. (There were always exceptions but they were recognized as such.)

    Yes, I'm just an old crank. But at least I won't shit in your place without buying a lousy cup of coffee.

  • John||

    Nothing makes businesses more welcoming to young black men than the knowledge that any confrontation with them could lead to you being on the wrong end of a progressive mob.

  • Enjoy Every Sandwich||

    Yeah, progressives. Aren't they the ones always lecturing us about "civilization"? Apparently the key ingredients of civilization are high taxes and mobs.

  • ||

    France nods in agreement.

  • No Longer Amused||

    Meaningless political covering.

  • Ken Hagler||

    Starbucks is behaving foolishly. They're going to give up an entire afternoon's worth of business for 8,000 stores just for virtue signaling? What's the point? It's not like the SJWs will ever be satisfied by anything they do anyway. They should just tell the perpetually outrage to get lost, and if they really want to do something to keep this from happening again, just spend 30 seconds sending an email to the store managers saying that henceforth only white men may be asked to leave.

  • Ron||

    doesn't starbucks by closing the store for a day admitting wrong doing thus opening themselves up for class action suit on racist grounds?

  • buybuydandavis||

    "It's perfectly plausible that in this case the policy was selectively enforced in a racist way."

    What is a racist way of enforcing the policy? Waving a Nazi flag while you do it? Having WrongFeelz while you do it?

  • Nardz||

    And isn't assuming racism - because of nothing beyond the color of the skin of the people involved - selectively spotlighting an incident in a racist way?
    So... isn't Robby the real racist here?

  • Nardz||

    How I long for the day when,
    "Starbucks CEO Kevin Johnson is currently in the middle of an apology tour, having appeared on Good Morning America, spoke with furious local politicians, and met with the arrested men,"
    is followed by a quote from the CEO along the lines of:
    "After our meeting, I've discovered that those guys are assholes and look strung out as hell. Fuck them. That manager is getting promoted to corporate. We're shutting down every store in Philly. Protesters can just fuck right off."

  • Eidde||

    "Starbucks announced just moments ago that it would close 8,000 stores on May 29 in order to to conduct racial bias training."

    What will people do with all the extra spending money they suddenly have thanks to not buying overpriced coffee?

  • buybuydandavis||

    What did their friend have to say when he showed up and they weren't there?

    I do hope the arrested duo left their friend's name and description so the staff could let him know his friends had already left.

    I'm filled with such sadness, picturing their friend waiting and waiting and waiting. Sniff.

  • Eidde||

    I think there was an actual friend and he was pissed.

  • creech||

    A lawyer acquaintance, with a somewhat similar situation in the downtown Philly business, believes the real problem is that Starbucks was bending over backward not to discriminate! According to him, the only way a business owner in downtown can eject homeless - without their advocates jumping all over the business - is to strictly enforce the rules against anyone loitering without purchasing or trying to just use the restroom. So, to not kick these two loafers out would have been to discriminate against other loafers who for one reason or another (body order, inappropriate language, panhandling, pooping on the restroom floor) were the real targets of the policy.

  • John||

    That makes a lot of sense.

  • ||

    This thread really annoyed me.

    As for Starbucks, they're idiots. Never apologize and never try to be 'woke'.

    They will eat you.

  • Pat001||

    Virtue-signalling can be costly.

  • southernsara||

    Just to throw my two cents in as a former Starbucks employee: it is against policy to throw anyone out unless they are causing some sort of disruption. People are to be encouraged to treat the store like a living room in hopes that they will be repeat customers and spend more money in the long run. Unless these guys were causing some kind of problem that hasn't been brought to light yet, the manager acted against explicit company training and policy.

  • ||

    Finally. Some kind of explanation.

    So SB has a different take on things. Their right.

  • ||

    I'd rather save my energy for the fury you're about to unleash.

  • Red Rocks White Privilege||

    It's spelled D-u-m-b-f-u-c-k H-I-h-n-s-a-n-o.

    Perhaps your fellow cheeseboard holder can explain it to you.

  • Red Rocks White Privilege||

    Dumbfuck Hihnsano shrieks like a bitch when he can't get in the last word.

  • Sevo||

    "Keep destroying the libertarian brand;"
    I don't think you need any assistance.

  • Red Rocks White Privilege||

    I'm the one who meets the definition, fiscally conservative and socially liberal.

    That would explain your hard-on for gun bans.

  • Red Rocks White Privilege||

    Dumbfuck Hihnsano shrieks like a bitch when he can't get in the last word.

  • Joseph C. Moore (USN Ret.||

    Does no one see the set up here? Two black men come into Starbucks, do not even purchase a small coffee and loiter with the excuse of waiting for a friend. A business has the legal option of not allowing Loitering for any period. A White man comes in (I expect who is an activist for leftist causes) and they have created a scene of supposed RACISM! Bull Sh*t, no apology to these leftist morons needed. The police colluded by arresting these troublmakers instead of just enforcing the loitering act and telling them to find another place to (supposedly) wait for their "friend" whom I surmise to be "that socialist/Marxist activist" to destroy the bloody won war to attain autonomy for our Republic from a monarchy.

  • Dread Pirate Roberts||

    Here's a good rule of thumb: never call the cops on someone unless you're all right with that person getting shot as a potential outcome.

  • Vernon Depner||

    And also consider the risk that YOU will get shot if you call the cops.

  • sharmota4zeb||

    If you think that's bad, I had a friend from Afghanistan who got locked up in a psych ward and discharged to another county, because he sat down and refused to leave a local business when asked. A business is less racist towards customers when they have friends who can shut down the business with a protest. That begs the question, how many people have friends who are willing to shut down a business with a protest instead of protesting nearby without disrupting the business? I'm skeptical of the complaint.

  • AD-RtR/OS!||

    And the coffee will taste even worse.

  • vek||

    This whole thing is all in what we don't know. Those guys don't look super sketchy, like homeless people or anything, which was my first thought. People kick those sort out of places all the time.

    But we still don't know if they had a bad attitude. Or if they they SEEMED like they were not being honest when they said they were waiting for somebody. Not that we'll ever find out, but that may well have been a lie. Did they just say that, and then go sit by the bathroom, hoping to catch somebody else on the way out the door to sneak in to use it?

    We'll never know. But to assume this is racism is just lefty nut balls crazy bullshit. As per usual. They could have just seemed disingenuous in their story, they could have been rude/aggressive, who knows. There are many legit reasons they could have been denied and told to fuck off.

  • vek||

    Did I say it was impossible for it to be racism??? No. Most people in 2018 aren't going to just throw ANYBODY out of a corporate business because they're XYZ race. BUT they might do it if they were being rude, or seemed to be lying, etc.

    If this had been 2 white guys thrown out "for no reason" do you think there would be a big stink about it? Of course not. Yet a black guy working at a Starbucks might be just as likely to boot 2 white guys out for being white as a white guy is to do it to black people.

    In other words it is likely a big fat nothing burger. I bet these guys were being rude dicks and the manager didn't like it. If they'd been white dicks nothing would have happened. But because blacks are a protected class, and white people are all evil, it's a huge media story.

  • vek||

    It's not my fault blacks are AT LEAST 3-4x more likely to commit almost every category of crime than white folks.

    Have YOU ever lived somewhere with a large black population? I did. I grew up in a minority majority city. Their culture is broken as fuck. That's not my fault, and whitey can't fix that for them either. They need to get their shit together if they ever want to lose the stigma they have rightly earned for themselves.

    I treat all people equally when I first meet them. But if somebody shows right off to be ghetto trash, or white trash for that matter, then that changes how I will interact with them. There just happens to be a lot more ghetto trash than white trash as a percentage of the population.

  • gphx||

    How the fuck is screaming at someone through a megaphone from 3 feet away not assault? Too bad that barista didn't shove it up the guy's ass so he could set a world record for loudest flatulence.

  • Zeb||

    Jesus, people have lost their goddamn minds. One employee makes a questionable call that might have something to do with some racial biases and all of a sudden the whole company is racist. Seems to be some weird assumptions here, first that the call to the police was in fact racially motivated, which is not the obvious or only possible explanation, and second that this somehow means that Starbucks has done something wrong, not just one employee.

    Then there is the assumption that racial bias training is in any way effective, and is not in fact counterproductive. As far as I can figure out there is no evidence to support that assumption either.

    God I hate activists.

  • Zeb||

    And how come no one is calling the police on the megaphone guy? Or did he buy a coffee before shouting in poor beardy's face?

  • NoVaNick||

    Starfucks has become the sterile PC face of white urban progressivism, so this couldn't have happened to a more deserving business. Their coffee sucks too

  • Pat001||

    Can Starbucks employees still refuse service to gun owners, law enforcement officers and anyone who looks like a Trump supporter.

  • gphx||

    Only if they're white apparently.

  • Red Rocks White Privilege||

    Dumbfuck Hihnsano knows all about lies because he does it all the time.

  • Red Rocks White Privilege||

    Dumbfuck Hihnsano shrieks like a bitch when he can't get in the last word.

  • arbe59||

    Legitimate law enforcement question. I got into it with someone about this same incident a few days ago, one of the progressives who sees racism and police abuse of power anywhere the cops are white and the people they engage with are not. While we didn't disagree about the possible racism of the store manager, I defended the cops actions since they didn't decide to call themselves on these two. This person insisted that cops have the discretion about whether or not to enforce the law. I know that in certain circumstances this is true, such as whether or not to pull over a person for speeding. However, the officer in that case is making the decision whether or not to initiate anything. In a case like this, where police are being called to enforce civil, private property trespass law, and where the store manager has standing as an agent for the property owner....does anyone know if the cops can just say "we don't see a problem here, we aren't going to do anything about this"?

  • Vernon Depner||

    Legally, the cops do have that discretion. They are under no obligation to arrest anyone unless a warrant has been issued, or the law specifies they must in such particular cases (such as in states that require arrest of domestic violence suspects). What their employer requires might be a different matter—their department could have policies and procedures requiring arrests in some cases, or could discipline them for poor judgement in that regard in a particular case. A citizen can't demand that the cops arrest someone, nor take any legal action against them for their failure to do so.

  • arbe59||

    Thanks

  • vek||

    I can see where they could decide not to ARREST someone... But I don't see how the police wouldn't have a legal obligation to remove them from your property, and then let them walk away.

  • Azathoth!!||


    Paper Wasp|4.17.18 @ 3:17PM|#

    We have no idea what the men were doing before the employee called the cops; they could have been disruptive. Is it moral to camp out on someone else's private property indefinitely, when you know damned well that private property is provided by the owner for the comfort and enjoyment of paying customers? No.

    Actually, this isn't true. We have video evidence of what they were doing. They were harassing other customers. They waited by the restrooms and interrogated a person who came out. They then went to confront the manager (a WOC) over this. That was when she told them they had to leave. She called the police because they wouldn't leave after she'd asked them to go.

    So you see, we know.

  • Empress Trudy||

    Starbucks needs to fire all white employees and start over with only black Mexican gay trans Muslim workers

  • Vernon Depner||

    Bring on the Starbuckbots.

  • prediksi hongkong||

    Dapatkah karyawan Starbucks masih menolak layanan kepada pemilik senjata api, petugas penegak hukum, dan siapa saja yang terlihat seperti pendukung Trump.

  • Jujucat||

    It's a coffee shop.

  • prediksifajar||

    say no to racism

GET REASON MAGAZINE

Get Reason's print or digital edition before it’s posted online