Meet the Other Phone. Child-safe in minutes.

Meet the Other Phone.
Child-safe in minutes.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

to think people don't understand what discrimination is?

67 replies

StealthPolarBear · 06/04/2010 13:05

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

OP posts:
StealthPolarBear · 06/04/2010 14:31

Oh and btw, just because I don't think it's discrimination for employers not to offer the job to a fat, ginger person doesn't mean I think it's right. Of course it isn't - it's nasty and stupid. I just don't think it classes as discrimination.

OP posts:
tethersend · 06/04/2010 14:34

s'alright stealth... I am all three today

minipie · 06/04/2010 14:34

Ok how about this.

A B&B owner is wrongfully discriminating if they refuse to accept customers because of a characteristic that cannot be expected to make them more difficult guests. For example, their hair colour, sexuality, race, etc.

They are not wrongfully discriminating (IMO) if they refuse to accept customers because of a characteristic that can reasonably be expected to make them more difficult guests. For example, if they refuse those who have young children (who are likely to be noisier/essier than adults) or pets (likewise). Of course, the blanket ban is pretty unfair on parents of immaculately-behaved children/pets, but still, it's not discrimination.

winnybella · 06/04/2010 14:34

Yes, but I think it's pretty sensible to say that if I have two candidates for a job, and I give it to the less qualified one because of the other one's hair colour/freckles, that I would be discriminating against him because of his appearance.

Just because it's not under employment law in the UK doesn't mean it's not a discrimination.

AFAIK there have been several succesful lawsuit based on this in the US, for example.

It makes sense to say that discriminating against someone because of any aspects of him that are his fundamental rights like religion, sexual orientation, political views etc is wrong.

In your list there is listed 'language abilities'- we could argue that is something that could be changed.

It's not black and white.

I think you are singling out the basic discrimination criteria ie people hating blacks or gays- that's the obvious one.

I still would go with someone not hiring a woman because she's fat being a discrimination.

winnybella · 06/04/2010 14:35

agree with minipie

StealthPolarBear · 06/04/2010 14:37

but winnybella in this particular instance I am arguing about the legal definition. What's the point in labelling it discrimination (which implies it's illegal) unless it is.
I realise that other people use the term a lot more loosely, to mean "treating differently because of some characteristic", and accept I was wrong about that. But if you say you were discriminated against when you were refused a job or a room at the B&B then surely you mean the employer / owner acted illegally?

OP posts:
tethersend · 06/04/2010 14:40

minipie has it.

I think.

muddleduck · 06/04/2010 14:41

you might use it in that way, but IMO you can't object to other people using the term more loosely - that is just how language is!

you are of course correct that enforcing the law(s) that protect specfic groups against discrimination does not open the floodgates for chilchilla owning mass murderers.

winnybella · 06/04/2010 14:42

Aaah,sorry, SPB.
I thought that if that was the case, then the easiest thing would be to find a link to a some gouvernment website stating the criteria of discrimination in the beginning of the thread, though?
I guess in the UK it's not illegal to refuse a job to someone on the basis of hating all gingers or fatties then.
I wonder what the law is in other countries?
Have to go now, because dd woke up.

StealthPolarBear · 06/04/2010 14:49

you're right winny, I've since looked and can't find one, which makes me think I am wrong () and you can argue discrimination on the basis of anything for goods and services.
Don't tell DH I'm wrong - I'll never live it down.

OP posts:
muddleduck · 06/04/2010 14:54

no, I think you were right SPB that there is a very specific set of legal protections (disability, sex, age ec)

StealthPolarBear · 06/04/2010 14:55

for goods and services? Or just employment? If there are, why can I not find them!!

OP posts:
skihorse · 06/04/2010 15:00

stealth This is quite a long article standpointmag.co.uk/features-march-10-where-the-far-left-joins-the-far-right-nick-cohen-western-guil t but I think you might like it.

StealthPolarBear · 06/04/2010 15:04

thanks skihorse
have just skimmed it - dd just woken up - and am embarrassed to say i don't really get it!

OP posts:
darcymum · 06/04/2010 15:12

I think discrimination is a very complex thing.

For example twin set and pearls middle aged woman with years of experience working in a shop, applies for a job in a place selling clothes for goths/punks is beaten by straight out of school young Goth who is given the job because the owners liked the way she looked. Is middle aged woman being discriminated against?

As for people being refused accommodation because they have children (I do have a bit of a bee in my bonnet about that) well I see that as discrimination and so do many other countries who dont allow it to go on.

darcymum · 06/04/2010 15:14

I was once refused a hair cut because the salon only cut black hair (I am white). If the shoe was on the other foot I would definitely say it was discrimination and wrong, but not so sure in this case.

skihorse · 06/04/2010 18:26

lol @ darcy - you've just reminded me of a situation 15 years ago when I'd just come in to a bit of money and decided to have some pampering. I strolled in to a big salon in the middle of Croydon and there was lots of sucking in of teeth - I hadn't realised I'd commited a huge faux-pas! I'd been past it weekly on the bus and though "I must try there..."

New posts on this thread. Refresh page