421

Gay man says he was assaulted by Shake Shack employees after kissing his boyfriend at D.C. location (www.nbcnews.com)

submitted 2 months ago by MicroWave@lemmy.world to c/news@lemmy.world

175 comments fedilink hide all child comments

Christian Dingus, 28, was with his partner when, he says, employees told the couple not to kiss inside, and the argument escalated outside.

A gay man accused a group of Washington, D.C., Shake Shack employees of beating him after he kissed his boyfriend inside the location while waiting for their order.

Christian Dingus, 28, was with his partner and a group of friends at a Dupont Circle location Saturday night when the incident occurred, he told NBC News. They had put in their order and were hanging around waiting for their food.

“And while we were back there — kind of briefly — we began to kiss,” Dingus said. “And at that point, a worker came out to us and said that, you know, you can’t be doing that here, can’t do that type of stuff here.”

The couple separated, Dingus said, but his partner got upset at the employee and insisted the men had done nothing wrong. Dingus’ partner was then allegedly escorted out of the restaurant, where a heated verbal argument occurred.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[-] kryptonianCodeMonkey@lemmy.world -2 points 2 months ago

Please put more words in my mouth. Blatantly misquote me and misconstrue my basic English to mean whatever you want it to mean. Strawman me, daddy!

[-] Samvega@lemmy.blahaj.zone 7 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)

That's interesting. You get to claim that a gay person was lying about kissing their boyfriend, but when you feel that assumptions are being made about you, you flip out. Do you often find that you treat people in ways that you don't accept for yourself to be treated?

You said: "There is never a reason for either party to escalate a verbal disagreement to a physical one, but..."

To me, that reads as, "It's not OK. Except..."

Maybe you should have phrased it differently, e.g.:

There is never a reason for either party to escalate a verbal disagreement to a physical one.

I think that, maybe, the kissing described was more heavy and sexual in nature than they described. This does not mean they deserved to be attacked.

Actually, I'm going to edit my post, because me supposing they were kissing extra hard has no bearing on the violence done against them. I said the violence was wrong, so saying 'but they might have been kissing offensively hard' is stupid. It doesn't matter. I said it didn't matter, and then I said it like I did matter. I'm going to remove that part, because it's stupid, and makes me look suspicious.

I ask again:

It's not okay to spread the idea that strangers store their own sexual secretions in jars. Except, in your case...

Imagine that I finished that sentence by giving spurious reasons as to why I think it's okay to spread a made up idea like that. Would you say 'fair enough' in response? Is it fair that I make you an exception, without evidence?

this post was submitted on 19 Aug 2024

421 points (97.3% liked)

News

23276 readers

4118 users here now

Welcome to the News community!

Rules:

1. Be civil

Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.

2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.

Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. We have an actively updated blocklist, which you can see here: https://lemmy.world/post/2246130 if you feel like any website is missing, contact the mods. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.

3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.

Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.

4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.

Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.

5. Only recent news is allowed.

Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.

6. All posts must be news articles.

No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.

7. No duplicate posts.

If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.

8. Misinformation is prohibited.

Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.

9. No link shorteners.

The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.

10. Don't copy entire article in your post body

For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.

founded 1 year ago

MODERATORS

rjc@lemmy.world

Thekingoflorda@lemmy.world

gedaliyah@lemmy.world

Blackbeard@lemmy.world

little_cow@lemmy.world

jeffw@lemmy.world