Friends of Dorothy need not apply. (redux)

[freddie]

"Well then, I'm sure you understand why members of the LGBT community would be upset if their gatherings were stopped as well."

 

"Prestige is in the process of initiating its IPO and the last thing they want is to be seen as anti-gay."

 

TPA & gnomie1 - Once again, I beg you to maintain the distinction between not allowing (or "stopping") LGBT gatherings and not announcing them in Passages. That is not a trivial distinction by any means.

 

Although I would agree that it would be a stupid policy to not announce LGBT get-togethers in Passages if many other social groups' gatherings were indeed announced, I would argue that such a policy would not be as much "anti-gay" as "clueless", which some staff members at various levels, from the top to the bottom, on the ship and at HQ, might well be. However, it is not clear at all from the various posts whether other social groups are being favored by announcements when FOD gatherings are not. Perhaps some genuine examples of such events would add a bit of weight to this discussion.

 

BTW, as long as we're being highly PC (and I will fight to the death, or at least to a heavy sweat, any challenge to my status as the most PC person within 100 square miles), our current term for our community is LGBTQ. True, some people are now promoting LGBTQI; but that is simply becoming pretty cumbersome for the signs in our parades, isn't it?

 

ST - I think that Wripro was attempting to make a small (highlight "small") joke in his post. He is not in the slightest homophobic as far as I can tell from his posts. And, as for the issue of "LGBT experts", I would suggest that there are many of them, including you and me. Further, as a subscriber to The Advocate from its first slim edition, I would note that there are a lot of writers in that publication who would claim to be LGBT experts. Hmm, do you think that we could convince Regent to have Camille Paglia, Andrew Sullivan, or Dan Savage do a few lectures on a cruise?

 

Cheers, Fred

[Suite Travels]

Fred, great post and I agree with you. So many people stepping out and I don't like the words coming out..just step forward and be yourself. Nobody cares what we are when traveling or cruising. It really has not been questioned in many years. Nobody cares anymore. If you enjoy someone's company enjoy it and have a good time.

[gnomie1]

Although I only have a short five year history with Regent, my Mom (and my late Dad :)) have been sailing since the Radisson Diamond days and the comments has been that there have been more changes in the past two years than in the past fifteen combined, not all for the better. We started to notice some serious problems on our cruise last summer (which is when I made my first post on CC and people thought I was a troll because after much thought, decided not to post the follow-up - that may change, stay tuned) and our cruise last year from Dubai to Sydney was not a happy experience. After talking to many people, it is now quite obvious that under new leadership, many decisions are being made in the home office by individuals who are so far removed from the actual ship and do not realize the impact these decisions ultimately have on the paying passenger. To be quite honest, I am quite concerned in the direction that Regent is taking - I would love to know why the decision was made to simply eliminate the mention of certain groups, unless they are going to claim it was a "space problem" and that there is no longer sufficient room in Passages to list all the groups so the decision was made to list none. Simple solution - add another piece of paper - at a minimum of $1000 per day per person, adding another piece of paper is not going to adversely affect the balance sheet.

 

On another point - I do understand why the Friends of Bill is still mentioned. Individuals trying to stay sober (which can be especially hard to do with the alcohol flowing freely) need the support of others and have become accustomed to attending meetings in their daily lifestyle. Also, some people may be required to attend - if someone was arrested for DUI and under court ordered rehab - they may need to prove to their probation officer that group support was available. A couple of years ago I had an email from someone I had met on the ship - I had mentioned that I keep all the Passages as a reminder of my trips and they had been in contact with someone else on the cruise who needed Passages just for that reason - I gladly xeroxed and mailed them.

 

In some office buildings in NYC (and I am sure in other parts of the country) there are daily meetings, sometimes held multiple times each day, for individuals trying to stay sober from drugs and alcohol. As they say, they take one day at a time. This is not a social event, but is made available to deal with a more serious matter that if left unchecked, can lead to death, not only of the individual, but of others if DUI. I have a friend who has been sober for more than twenty years. but still attends some type of support group everyday and that is what determines his vacations and everything else in his life. He always tells me that when he goes to bed each night, he reminds himself that he made it through yet another day without the need for drugs or alcohol.

 

gnomie :)

[Travelcat2]

Just a quick post to say that today's "Passages" did print a meeting for Friends of Bill W.

[TPAtravelfan]

Has anyone who is interested in seeing FOD continue taken the time to contact upper management (i.e. Miami, not on the ship) to inquire as to why the decision was made to d/c FOD and the reasoning behind it?

 

Hopefully, someone from upper management has already read this thread, but a letter will also be forthcoming.

 

Continued feedback from readers here would be also be appreciated. If you think the new policy is bad, please say so!

 

Thanks, everyone.

[CruisetheCs]

Hopefully, someone from upper management has already read this thread, but a letter will also be forthcoming.

 

Continued feedback from readers here would be also be appreciated. If you think the new policy is bad, please say so!

 

Thanks, everyone.

 

I think upper management has a number of blind spots and that they are clueless when it comes to PR around issues such as this. If you are going to take away something from a group of people, especially a group that has been subjected to a pattern of discrimination, you better be proactive about explaining why and the reason better be a good one.

 

The GM and staff on the ship should be able to explain these policy changes if there is any valid reason for the change. And the rationale needs to go beyond something such as "we have too many requests to publish them all." They need to be able to give some specific examples of how the prior policy led to problems. My guess is that the staff can't explain this which simply makes the decision less credible.

 

Regent corporate office could respond on this thread, but of course they haven't. Regent's refusal to publish a meeting notice for FOD is beyond my comprehension. And doing so without an explanation is beyond stupid. Bottom line is this action smacks of discrimination or utter stupidity or both.

[lincslady]

I hesitate to ask - I know what LGBT is, but what is Q or Q1? Would love to know - if it is something which can be put down in print.

[wripro]

Suite travels,

 

I guess you wouldn't recognize a tongue in a cheek if it were straight or gay. You are very quick to call people names without having the least inkling of what you are talking about. Why am I not surprised?

[Travelcat2]

Agree with Suite Travels 100%!

[Suite Travels]

Suite travels,

 

I guess you wouldn't recognize a tongue in a cheek if it were straight or gay. You are very quick to call people names without having the least inkling of what you are talking about. Why am I not surprised?

 

Tongue in a cheek I do recognize. Yes I do know what I am talking about. Quote me on any name calling I said. First of all it is tongue in cheek not tongue in a cheek.:rolleyes: Your inference was quite oblvious to others as well and it really is not funny at least not to me.

 

Just let this thread go into Dorthy Land.

Edited July 20, 2014 by Suite Travels

[TPAtravelfan]

"TPA & gnomie1 - Once again, I beg you to maintain the distinction between not allowing (or "stopping") LGBT gatherings and not announcing them in Passages. That is not a trivial distinction by any means.

 

Freddie, when your business offers something to a specific group for an extended period of time, then relinquishes that offer, that decision deserves an explanation. When the group you relinquish an offer to has been subjected to a long history of discrimination, there had better be a good reason.

 

There is no good reason offered in this case. In fact, it is simply bad policy, especially on a line where the norm is sophisticated travelers who generally embrace their LGBT cruise mates.

Edited July 20, 2014 by TPAtravelfan

[Suite Travels]

Freddie, when your business offers something to a specific group for an extended period of time, then relinquishes that offer, that decision deserves an explanation. When the group you relinquish an offer to has been subjected to a long history of discrimination, there had better be a good reason.

 

There is no good reason offered in this case. In fact, it is simply bad policy, especially on a line where the norm is sophisticated travelers who generally embrace their LGBT cruise mates.

 

Thank you. You said it so well. No applause buttons on CC. CC needs emoticons on here.:D

[CruisetheCs]

I'm curious whether any Regent employee has attempted to provide a rationale or is it being passed off as solely a corporate decision?

 

I'm not asking anyone to reveal who said what or break any confidences, but wonder if staff has some back story on this that would offer a clue to what is going on.

 

I do think that it would be helpful to communicate directly with corporate and see what Regent's official response is.

[Suite Travels]

All I can tell you is American Airlines has a zero discrimination policy. I can't believe this is the policy of Regent either customers or employees. Gay marriage will become the norm and so will medical marijuana. The bible beaters will still be out there and on the ships we cruise. I avoid them at all costs.

[quepaquete]

The bible beaters will still be out there and on the ships we cruise. I avoid them at all costs.

 

Careful, that could considered "reverse discrimination". I embrace them and have found some who happened to be nice people.

 

On our last Regent cruise my partner and I were dancing together and we got some "looks" but we just ignored them. When we went back to our seats, two couples (heterosexual couples) came to tell congratulations for being so brave and they wished that was the norm. One couple said they had a family member who travel only on chartered cruises because he and his partners were afraid of discrimination. By the third or forth night, no more "looks" and we were seen as regulars.

 

On the same cruise there was NO meetings advertised but we meet another couple who had met another couple, who had met another couple. Towards the end of the cruise we had a big get together at one of the bars, and a few straight couples, with whom some of us had made friends with, had joined us. Then we had requested a table for ten at Compass Rose, and had the best service we ever experienced on the whole cruise.

 

We try to be like everyone else and mingle as normal, and we find that most people are accepting. If we isolate and try to mingle only with gay people then we are showing our discrimation.

 

By the way, we are still in contact with some people from that cruise and they are all heterosexual couples and one single woman. We are not in touch with any of the other four gay couples we met. Go figure!

[Travelcat2]

Love the last post:D It seems to me that Regent just stopped listing almost all groups including Cruise Critic, service organizations, etc. Even though they did not list our Cruise Critic Meet and Greet, when I spoke to the F&B Director, he arranged to have the coffee station and Reception sent out invitations.

 

Perhaps a Meet and Greet type event could be arranged for LGBT through Roll Call? Even when we are not given a private space for our meetings, I have arranged CC events by posting the date, time and area (for instance, port side of the Observation Lounge) on Roll Call. We have had some good turnouts without Regent doing a thing to assist us. Anyway, just a thought.

[TPAtravelfan]

Perhaps a Meet and Greet type event could be arranged for LGBT through Roll Call?

 

If you read through this thread, I believe I've already made a solid case against the new Regent policy of excluding LGBT "Friends of Dorothy" gatherings from the daily agenda listings. I have demonstrated that many different groups are still well represented in the "Passages" printed agenda.

 

While your idea of using Roll Call on Cruise Critic is certainly valid, I will point out that Friends of Dorothy gatherings on cruise ships existed for many decades before CruiseCritic.com was even a concept on a cocktail napkin. Our business is with Regent, not CruiseCritic.com.

 

Regent should have an obligation to articulate the reasons behind it's new policy decision to not include LGBT listings. The many thousands of long time and loyal LGBT Regent customers deserve a valid reason as to why they have been taken off the daily agenda. Frankly, I don't believe there is one and that explains Regent's response: *crickets*

 

It is my experience that Regent, fellow Regent passengers and PCH Holdings largely embrace the LGBT community. The act of eliminating LGBT gatherings from the Passages simply does not make sense based on this.

Edited July 21, 2014 by TPAtravelfan

[evitacruiser]

Could it be that LGBT is now so normal, so mainstream, that such meets are no longer deemed necessary?

[ChatKat in Ca.]

But they are also no longer allowing Service Clubs to be on the passages too. It's not just LGBT; It's Friends of Bill W.

 

So it's sort of arbitrary....

[TPAtravelfan]

Could it be that LGBT is now so normal, so mainstream, that such meets are no longer deemed necessary?

 

In some respects that is very true. I think a "Friends of Dorothy" on request policy is a good way for Regent to address this.

 

But one only needs to look towards the various media outlets to see that the LGBT community still has a long way to go for certain elements of the population to consider them mainstream.

 

Certain groups would prefer that the LGBT community is invisible. We'd like to exclude Regent from that list.

[TPAtravelfan]

But they are also no longer allowing Service Clubs to be on the passages too. It's not just LGBT; It's Friends of Bill W. So it's sort of arbitrary....

 

Arbitrary indeed. Take a look at the groups that are represented during the past few days in Passages:

 

Friends of Bill W. (represented every other day or so)

Solo and Social Travelers (sometimes twice a day)

Religious Travelers (for weekend services listings)

Needlepoint Get Togethers (every other day or so)

Bridge Player Socials

 

And that's exactly my point.

[evitacruiser]

But, are they all not lifestyle choices? I don't see LGBT in that light. So, I see it as a positive.

Edited July 21, 2014 by evitacruiser

[Suite Travels]

The LBGT is NOT considered mainstream by any means. Just take a look at the gay marriage laws in many states including my state Florida. Meet & Mingle groups are put together and on some cruises from CC published on the ship.

 

Regent or other cruise lines will find the LBGT money going elsewhere if any line does this. The struggle that the gay community all over the world has been very hard and took baby steps to get to where we are. I don't think Rosa Parks would be happy with Regent or any venue that decriminates in a subtle way.

[Travelcat2]

If you read through this thread, I believe I've already made a solid case against the new Regent policy of excluding LGBT "Friends of Dorothy" gatherings from the daily agenda listings. I have demonstrated that many different groups are still well represented in the "Passages" printed agenda.

 

While your idea of using Roll Call on Cruise Critic is certainly valid, I will point out that Friends of Dorothy gatherings on cruise ships existed for many decades before CruiseCritic.com was even a concept on a cocktail napkin. Our business is with Regent, not CruiseCritic.com.

 

Regent should have an obligation to articulate the reasons behind it's new policy decision to not include LGBT listings. The many thousands of long time and loyal LGBT Regent customers deserve a valid reason as to why they have been taken off the daily agenda. Frankly, I don't believe there is one and that explains Regent's response: *crickets*

 

It is my experience that Regent, fellow Regent passengers and PCH Holdings largely embrace the LGBT community. The act of eliminating LGBT gatherings from the Passages simply does not make sense based on this.

 

There have been many interesting points brought up on this thread. As I stated previously, with the exception of Friends of Bill W. and religious services, the groups on your list are sponsored by Regent and a member of the crew is almost always in attendance.

 

In any case, Regent has no obligation to articulate the reasons behind any of it's policy decisions. My personal feeling is that PCH does not discriminate against anyone. I remember when a decision was made not to sponsor Cruise Critic events. Some people were angry but it really didn't change anything. Either we accept Regent's decisions or we decide to sail on another cruise line (and, some people have/will make that choice).

[CruisetheCs]

There have been many interesting points brought up on this thread. As I stated previously, with the exception of Friends of Bill W. and religious services, the groups on your list are sponsored by Regent and a member of the crew is almost always in attendance.

 

In any case, Regent has no obligation to articulate the reasons behind any of it's policy decisions. My personal feeling is that PCH does not discriminate against anyone. I remember when a decision was made not to sponsor Cruise Critic events. Some people were angry but it really didn't change anything. Either we accept Regent's decisions or we decide to sail on another cruise line (and, some people have/will make that choice).

 

The idea that there are only two options, namely accept things as they are or move to a different cruise line, pops up on CC's discussions from time to time. This reminds me of arguments over improving things in the United States such as health care delivery that end with someone saying "well, if you don't like things in the USA, you can move to Canada."

 

If the belief is that nothing can or will change with Regent, it is a sad perspective on Regent's management. Regent can change and I see no reason to discourage people from protesting about Regent's policies or about other things that passengers dislike about Regent.

 

As for having no obligation to respond, I feel that if Regent has an interest in fairness and in excellence, then it has an obligation to respond to policies that appear discriminatory or simply unfounded. If this FOD change has some sound basis, then Regent should explain the reason.

 

How difficult can it be for Regent to write a brief explanation here, onboard the ships, or somewhere? Silence is not golden in this instance, it is a tarnish on management.