Mellow Mushroom update: drugs are family-friendly, gays aren't?

Update 8/7: Mellow Mushroom management reconsidered and have restored the Indy to its former home in their restaurants. Hurray! Read the comments to find out more, and kudos to local owner Casey for listening and engaging his customers.

...

Barry recently wrote about Mellow Mushroom's decision to pull the Independent Weekly newspaper bins from its restaurant, close on the heels of its publishing a cover story featuring a transgendered individual. This included the Mellow Mushroom location in downtown Durham at the American Tobacco Campus.

A reader here at BCR wrote in to Mellow Mushroom via the feedback form on their web site to find out more about the decision and what motivated the removal of this issue. He reports receiving the following answer from Casey, the owner of the Triangle's Mellow Mushroom restaurants, which he shared with me in turn (emphasis added is mine):

Hi Will,  I am Casey and I own the MMs in the area.  I regret you do not agree with our decision about the Indy.    It had absolutely nothing to do with the article but rather the picture on the front cover that was eye level of children in our waiting area.  We have carried the Indy for so long I forgot it was there until a soccer mom complained about it.  After a few more comments/complaints we removed them.  Personally it takes a lot more than a newspaper to offend me.   We understand and appreciate that Mellow Mushroom attracts all walks of life as customers as well as employees.  We also know that is what makes the concept so successful.   However, any business in the service industry should do everything they can to make sure no one is offend or complains for any reason. 

The Indy is an adult newspaper and has become more so over the years.  Since Mellow Mushroom has grown from the small college town stores to becoming more family oriented, we decided it would be best to remove the Indy.

We greatly appreciate your business.

Casey

Certainly, any business has the right to make decisions about what image they want their business to present to customers. But I find it rather odd that Mellow Mushroom, of all places, would be defending this decision in the context of trying to be "family friendly" -- in conjunction with wanting to avoid offending anyone, anywhere, anytime.

After all, Mellow Mushroom's menu s filled with references to illegal drugs... from the mention of 'munchies' on the menu instead of appetizers, to sly comments about 'stone-baked' pizzas, to the rather trippy pictures lining the restaurant's walls. Now, they're done all in good humor, one might say, and there's some truth to that. Yet one can hardly imagine most 'family friendly' restaurants going to such lengths to wink at drug use on their menus and decor.

More to the point, what do you suppose the 'Shroom would do the moment that, say, Called2Action or Focus on the Family ran one of their 'alerts' campaigns against the restaurant? Would Mellow Mushroom again continue to assert that customers should never be offended and that in turn the restaurant's theme would have to go? Somehow, I doubt it.

It's a point Durham in general has struggled with -- the need to, as the stickers say, "Love Yourself," to have pride in the elements that make the city unique and distinct. Recognize that you'll attract folks that are looking for what the city has to offer, and that such distinctiveness will steer people who don't fit the city's verve to live somewhere else.

Part of that verve in Durham's case s open-mindedness and tolerance. Now personally, I've never taken an illegal drug in my entire life, college included. But it never bothered me that there were sly drug references on the walls of the restaurant. I'm much more disappointed that one of the best media outlets in the Triangle -- and one that is a constant clarion call for tolerance -- disappears from a restaurant I frequent.

Of course, there's more than one way to lose business. I've stopped eating at the Mellow Mushroom since this little event happened, actually bypassed it on three different occasions. (Bonus: more trips to Cinelli's, whose Grandma's pizza is terrific.) And I suspect I'm not the only one.

Let's just hope that the 'soccer moms' of the Triangle that Casey's worried about don't have Don Wildmon on speed-dial.

Comments

[9/9]

Mike,

His argument was not rational for the following reasons:

1. No one suggested a "ban" on visiting MM. A boycott and a ban are very different things.

2. There is a difference between not carrying the Indy and removing it as a specific objection to the image of a man in a bra. If some business that does not carry the Indy came out and said "we don't carry the paper because of the way it portrays transgendered individuals, I would object the same way.

3. The fact that many people here have the same view on the issue as I do does have anything to do with mob mentality.

Mark called me (and many other people here) disgusting. If he is going to insult me, I have no problem calling him an idiot and insulting him back.

[David]

"Would it be wrong of me to say that Mark is an idiot? Because, I have to say, that last post of his really makes him seem like an idiot."

I honestly do not know what is considered right or wrong in this blog, but calling someone a insulting name in reply only minimizes your position, not his. The mere inclusion of such a response only promotes additional negative backlash and does not add to productive conversation. I suggest education rather than vilification. Insulting someone in that way is demeaning for all parties and encourages others to rally around for a potential rant or attack. So, in this case, I am left with seconding Mike's reply.

When I visit BullCityRising, I enjoy reading a higher level of constructive response. Sorry, 9/9, but I did not derive anything constructive from your post. It appeared unnecessary making your follow-up even more incredulous. I say this as my opinion and irrespective of my position or the position of others with regard to this blog's issue.

However and for the record, I do find credibility in what the insulted poster was attempting to communicate as well as with a number, not all, of the replies I have read to date.

[9/9]

You gentlemen are free to think what you want about me and my posts, but I stand by my post. Mark is the first one who started posting insults. If he is going to be insulting people here, I don't feel bad about responding in kind.

[Travis]

It's a just a business that is trying to do it's job...it is very reasonable for someone to remove something from their store due to complaints. The fact that the design or theme of the menu and restaurant may include words like "munchies" doesn't matter, who hasn't heard the phrase munchies? As for their pizzas being "stone-baked", they are placed on pizza stones and baked, i'd say it's a pretty accurate description. The person who wrote this article is like every idiot that complains that something bothers them on t.v. If you don't like the decor or how management deals with issues that are brought to their attention, get out.

[Bull City Rising]

@Travis: Wow, dredging up the year-old articles! Glad to see you've found the magic of Google.

Ya know, first off, the 'Shroom has reinstituted the Indy, so my beef's done. But, hey, I did (for a while) get out. That's my right to do, right? And, hey, I have this shiny thing called... a blog! And, you know what? Writing about what I choose to do is within my rights to do, too, eh?

I don't see how choosing to exercise my rights -- to choose where to shop, or to write what I'd like on my blog -- interferes with anyone else's right to do as they wish.

But, hey, thanks for discovering the blogosphere! (PS -- I suspect you're not from 'round these here parts. They got way more complaints here in progressive Durham about removing the Indy than leaving it. One of the things I love about Durham -- and why I left the rats' nest of Orlando so many years back.)