AGEISM

Banning Those in Gen Z and a Few Millennials
   Most arguments about ageism involve attitudes toward the elderly and old age. I noticed recently an example of discrimination involving young people. I will leave it to you to debate the legal and ethical implications of not allowing those under the age of 30 to enter a restaurant. Here are some examples:

"A D.C. Cafe is Banning Patrons Under 30. Is It Legal?", Emily Heil, The Washington Post, Dec. 17, 2024.
"For years, the owners of Café 8, a Mediterranean restaurant and hookah bar in Washington’s Capitol Hill neighborhood, have wondered how they could keep their patrons’ noise down around their establishment, which backs up to a residential neighborhood.
“They park on the front, they blast music, they party in their cars and all those things,” says Elif Sam, who manages the restaurant for her family. Finally, last month, they decided to take a step to attract an older clientele, rather than the younger, rowdier crowds. So they adopted a policy banning patrons under 30 after 8:30 p.m."
As for the legal part, it's complicated as most legal things are and the arguments around age discrimination are numerous.

"Still, while the family introduced the policy to help keep the peace, it might run afoul of D.C. law.
Under federal law, age is not a protected class in service settings the way it is when it comes to employment. And laws that do apply to public accommodations, such as eateries, ban discrimination when it comes to race, religion, national origin or disability status — but not age.
In D.C., though, the Human Rights Act expands the kinds of traits that businesses can’t discriminate against, including age over 18, personal appearance and political affiliation.
“It’s pretty straightforward,” said Andrew Kline, principal of the Veritas Law Firm, who frequently works on cases involving D.C. restaurants. He noted that the D.C. law includes a clause granting exceptions for “business necessity,” such as allowing establishments to ban patrons under 21 to prevent underage drinking. But he questioned whether Café 8’s new rule would meet that standard. “I think making the case that there’s a business necessity for keeping [out people over 21] would be troublesome,” he said."

There are other cases of exclusion elsewhere in the country. For example in St. Louis:

"A Restaurant Wanting a ‘Grown and Sexy’ Vibe Bans Diners Under 30:

At Caribbean restaurant Bliss outside St. Louis, age limits draw support and condemnation," The Washington Post, June 10, 2024.

"When Marvin Pate and his wife opened Bliss, their Caribbean restaurant outside St. Louis, they were aiming for an upscale, luxe vibe. They put jollof rice and tropical cocktails on the menu, offered hookahs for patrons to enjoy — and banned diners under the age of 30.

Since opening its doors in May, the restaurant has operated with an unusual age restriction, allowing in only women at least 30 and men at least 35, rules that the owners have been defending as necessary to maintain the kind of “grown and sexy” atmosphere they’re aiming for. “This policy is in place to ensure a mature, sophisticated, and safe dining environment for everyone,” the restaurant said in a Facebook post."

Some additional examples are offered in the article, but I have not found any Canadian ones, although child-free condos and adult-only developments exist here. 

"Legally, restaurants have the right to impose age limits, because age is not a protected class in that context. Controversies around age restrictions usually have cropped up when restaurants have banned children. Last year, Nettie’s House of Spaghetti in New Jersey was both rebuked and praised when it banned kids under 10, citing the noise and “crazy messes” they brought.

It’s far less common for such rules to target adults. But there are exceptions: In San Antonio, Horizons & More bills itself as a 30-and-up destination “for the grown & mature.” And in New York, the Auction House cocktail bar imposes a 25-and-up policy on Fridays and Saturdays.

Two years ago, two TikTokers shared a tale of being turned away from Melody Bar & Grill in Los Angeles because they weren’t old enough for the establishment’s 30-plus night. One response to the video seemed to come from someone who appreciated the idea of a 20-something-free zone: “I know it hurts right now, but when you are 30 you’ll understand.”

  Lately we have noticed, when dining out, that restaurants are far too noisy, but generally that is not because of the age of the customers. Still, I am in favour of keeping out noisy people, even those over 30, especially if they carry phones. It also would be great to be able to keep out obnoxious people. I am not sure how one does that, but I am certain that in Canada denying some the right to dine would be problematic, although years ago women were denied entry into many bars. Where I grew up, people of a certain colour could not eat in most restaurants in our small town. I suppose it is best to simply succumb to the self selection process and assume and hope that people of all ages will segregate in a restaurant they choose to be in and that the others won't want to join them.