to think people don't understand what discrimination is?

[StealthPolarBear]

in this country you can't discriminate against ginger people, football fans, b&b owners, pets, pandas or Daily Mail readers!

OK, so am I wrong? Is it discrimination to be refused service based on hair colour? Has anyone ever sued? Or being a drunk? Or having a pet?
I'm genuinely interested btw as I feel I may be wrong since everyone is telling me I am It's always been drummed into me that discrimination is on the basis of race, religion, disability, sex, sexual orientation, erm...a couple of others. That was employment law, is it different for goods & services?

What probonbon?? I really am not following, sorry. I am not being patronising!

I'm not sure I understand what you're trying to say.
If I owned a B&B and put a sign outside saying "No Ginger people", would that be discrimination?
What about "No fatties"?
Or "No disabled people"?
Or "No Muslims"?
Or "No Christians"?
Or "No Guardianistas"?
Are you just trying to say that laws define certain types of discrimination and not others? Or .... what?

"If I didn't get a job because I am ginger, that would be discrimination."
On what grounds? It would have to be ethnicity I assume but it would be very difficult to uphold I think.

Dictionary definition:

"treating a person or particular group of people differently, especially in a worse way from the way in which you treat other people, because of their skin colour, religion, sex, etc."

It doesn't really help, does it?

as i said earlier, it depends on whether you are using the word in a strict legal sense (which I don't fully understand) or in the more general sense of being disadvantaged because you are a member of some group.

Well, principally, what's the difference in refusing a service based on skin colour versus hair colour? Why is one discrimination and the other isn't?

yes scarletlilybug, I think that's exactly what I'm saying, thanks for the summary
In response to the people who seem to think that requiring a B&B owner NOT to discriminate against a gay couple means they have to open their door to every knife wielding drunk who wants a room.

the law protects againts certain specific forms of discrimination, but that doesn't stop us using the word to refer to other (non-protected) forms of discrimination.

no, it doesn't tethersend. I'm sure there are categories, for employment law at least, assumed there would be similar ones for goods & services but maybe not. Maybe all you need to be 'discrimated against' is just to feel you have been...seems very odd.
probonbon, I hope I haven't offended you?

but muddleduck, IMO if it's not protected by law that's because it doesn't need to be. White, middle class, straight, non disabled people may occasionally be disadvantaged because of that, but they are unlikely to face any loss as a result of it - hence not discrimination.

and in the case of knife-wielding nutters, that is not discrimination because you would be making a judgement based on the behaviour of the individual themselves.

gosh no am not so fragile nor are you being patronising

am with muddleduck here

I'm pretty sure of that much

likewise for people with pets/pandas/children/chinchillas

thank goodness for that I genuinely wasn't being clever - I'm not that clever
Well people are arguing that if they can't discriminate in this way they'll need to let in Charles Manson and his chinchilla.

"IMO if it's not protected by law that's because it doesn't need to be."

no, no, no!

that would imply that all our laws were perfect and complete!

Our laws (try to) protect those groups that have (historically) been victims of the most discrimination, but it certainly does not mean that other forms of discrimination do not exist.

Agree, but not getting a job bacause of hair colour is a discrimaination- discrimination because of appearance-same if you were refused a job because you're ugly or fat.

I think perhaps the difference is in things you can and can't change- ie you don't have to get drunk, you don't have to take your children/pets to this particuliar B&B etc.

You can't change your appearance (obv. can colour your hair, but ykwim) or sexual preference or skin colour. Freedom of religion is a fundamental right, so that's discrimination as well.

and I stayed off that B&B thread because there are some forms of ignarance that are not worth arguing with.

hmm hyes I agree that the law should be (and is) changing as new things come about.

What if you don't get a job because you are fat, ugly and ginger?

winnybella - i think that is a very tricky argument to maintain. It suggests that it is ok to dscirminate against people on the basis of weight. It also gives a way out to people who believe that sexual orientation is a choice.

winnybella - I don;t think it is under employment law. Not unless you can prove discrimination under:

Race or color
Ethnicity or national origin
Sex or gender
Pregnancy
Religion or creed
Political affiliation
Language abilities
Citizenship
Disability or medical condition
Age
Sexual orientation
Gender identity
Marital status
Military veteran status
Military discharge status or anticipated military deployment

(ripped from wiki, hope it's right, there are more than I remember)

tethersend, I am going for a job interview tomorrow. Hope I'm not ugly, but I'm definitely the other two

Its against the law isnt it

tethersend - I think it is ok for employers to discriminate on those grounds as long as you are applying for a job as a model or actress