Results 1 to 68 of 68

Thread: When is discrimination ok?

  1. #1

    Default When is discrimination ok?

    Every so often I hear something pretty much 'discriminatory' towards a group of people (or favouring a select group of people by excluding everyone else) and I'm somewhat surprised that in this day and age such discrimination is still socially acceptable.

    Personally, I'm ok with a lot of the age discrimination directed towards youth and seniors and some of it directed towards one's sex (regarding schooling, drivers examinations, privacy issues and the like, respectively.). Some government legislated positions, such as towards First Nations people are grey areas but are often part of our heritage and agreed upon by both sides. Licensing, citizenship and others are very pragmatic.

    Others?




    P.S. I reserve the right to totally change my mind and position and to be totally wrong or ignorant in an opinion as this is something, like most things, that I haven't put a lot of thought into.


    .
    Last edited by KC; 10-11-2013 at 03:53 PM.

  2. #2

    Default

    As you noted above, you have no problem with certain aspects of discrimination. I think 'discrimination' is not a black or white matter. If someone makes an ethnic joke, a sexual joke, an age joke etc. some people (even if the joke is directed at their group) will laugh. Others, of that group, will call it discriminatory or racist. Personally, I think their are a lot of people out there that are to easily offended.
    I think Coun. Sohi should have left those ads on the bus. If 90% of honor killings are attributed to an ethnic/religious group then I think those ads were doing a public service to that group of women. If STD's are rising amongst a certain age group, put the ads where that age group can see them. I don't feel its discrimination, it's taken the message to the streets and making people aware. Most people throughout the world do have open minds and a sense of humor and take things in the manner they were intended. Then, there is the vocal minority who get offended at just about anything and make it known lout and clear that they are offended.
    Gone............................and very quickly forgotten may I add.

  3. #3
    Addicted to C2E
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Edmonton
    Posts
    772

    Default

    My gut says that it is never Ok .

    In our charter of rights and freedoms it guarantees against discrimination , except where they are trying to even things out through programs like affirmative action . This is I believe can be ambiguous in a fast changing world . Previously disadvantaged groups are not likely to let go of situation which may be of benefit . But it is the law of the land.

    From the Charter of Rights and Freedoms;

    Equality before and under law and equal protection and benefit of law


    15. (1) Every individual is equal before and under the law and has the right to the equal protection and equal benefit of the law without discrimination and, in particular, without discrimination based on race, national or ethnic origin, colour, religion, sex, age or mental or physical disability.

    Affirmative action programs


    15. (2) Subsection (1) does not preclude any law, program or activity that has as its object the amelioration of conditions of disadvantaged individuals or groups including those that are disadvantaged because of race, national or ethnic origin, colour, religion, sex, age or mental or physical disability.

    Text from the Department of Justice Canada.

  4. #4
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Bonnie Doon
    Posts
    5,445

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Gemini View Post
    Personally, I think their are a lot of people out there that are to easily offended.
    I think Coun. Sohi should have left those ads on the bus. If 90% of honor killings are attributed to an ethnic/religious group then I think those ads were doing a public service to that group of women. If STD's are rising amongst a certain age group, put the ads where that age group can see them. I don't feel its discrimination, it's taken the message to the streets and making people aware. Most people throughout the world do have open minds and a sense of humor and take things in the manner they were intended. Then, there is the vocal minority who get offended at just about anything and make it known lout and clear that they are offended.
    The ETS bus ads were discriminatory towards a particular segment of society. Are honour killings wrong? Yes, of course.

    But is it a widespread epidemic in North America? No!

    Stop Islamization of America is the organization who paid for the bus ads. Their response after ETS pulled the ads shows their true colours:
    In a post on her blog Atlas Shrugs, SIOA founder Pamela Geller says Edmonton Transit caved to “Muslim supremacist demands.”
    http://www.edmontonjournal.com/news/...112/story.html
    The objective of the bus ad was to isolate, embarrass, create suspicion, distrust and hatred toward a visible minority group. Sounds like discrimination to me.

  5. #5

    Default

    'Equality under the law'......................if an actual law was broken. The easily offended seem to get confused with that one.
    Gone............................and very quickly forgotten may I add.

  6. #6

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by North Guy66 View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Gemini View Post
    Personally, I think their are a lot of people out there that are to easily offended.
    I think Coun. Sohi should have left those ads on the bus. If 90% of honor killings are attributed to an ethnic/religious group then I think those ads were doing a public service to that group of women. If STD's are rising amongst a certain age group, put the ads where that age group can see them. I don't feel its discrimination, it's taken the message to the streets and making people aware. Most people throughout the world do have open minds and a sense of humor and take things in the manner they were intended. Then, there is the vocal minority who get offended at just about anything and make it known lout and clear that they are offended.
    The ETS bus ads were discriminatory towards a particular segment of society. Are honour killings wrong? Yes, of course.

    But is it a widespread epidemic in North America? No!

    Stop Islamization of America is the organization who paid for the bus ads. Their response after ETS pulled the ads shows their true colours:
    In a post on her blog Atlas Shrugs, SIOA founder Pamela Geller says Edmonton Transit caved to “Muslim supremacist demands.”
    http://www.edmontonjournal.com/news/...112/story.html
    The objective of the bus ad was to isolate, embarrass, create suspicion, distrust and hatred toward a visible minority group. Sounds like discrimination to me.
    And yet Canada now has honour killings in it's literature for immigrants. If it is not a problem, why is it there.
    http://www.chp.ca/better-solutions/i...-and-refugees/
    Gone............................and very quickly forgotten may I add.

  7. #7
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Bonnie Doon
    Posts
    5,445

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Gemini View Post
    And yet Canada now has honour killings in it's literature for immigrants. If it is not a problem, why is it there.
    http://www.chp.ca/better-solutions/i...-and-refugees/
    It's only a problem for intolerant people who look at a minority group with suspicion....namely Prime Minister Harper and his party base who wrote that garbage.

    Therefore, as a prerequisite to entry into Canada, immigrants, as part of their application process, must sign a formally binding pledge whereby they:

    1. Agree to abide by Canadian law.
    2. Agree to forego or abandon practices and traditions that are contrary to Canadian law and tradition such as:
      1. Sharia Law – which includes but is not limited to “honour” killings, polygamy, and the wearing of the burqa or niqab face covering in public
      2. Gang Violence
      3. Religious beliefs that run contrary to the Charter in that they demean individuals or jeopardize public safety
      4. Terrorism – which includes promoting and supporting subversive terrorist groups (the most numerous are those involving Muslim extremists, but there are others such as Tamil and Sikh organizations) in their country of origin and worldwide

    ^ Isn't point 1 and 2 redundant? Doesn't Canadian Law already cover crimes such as killings, gang violence, terrorism?

  8. #8

    Default

    Sure, it's for intolerant people like the ones mentioned in this article who have committed honour killings.

    http://www.canada.com/life/Honour+ki...638/story.html

    It's unfortunate that these characters spoil it for all the peaceful Muslims that do want to make Canada their home.

    It's also worth saying that honour killings are more of a 'religious' killing. In Canada the judicial law over rides the laws of religion. In some countries that is not the case.
    Last edited by Gemini; 10-11-2013 at 06:13 PM.
    Gone............................and very quickly forgotten may I add.

  9. #9

    Default

    Thinking whatever thoughts and harboring whatever feelings is not in any way culpable.

    Communicating said thoughts and feelings to others is dangerous at best, and extremely, punishably rude at worst.

    Actually doing something discriminatory is sub-human. We should be above that.

  10. #10

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Hull534 View Post
    My gut says that it is never Ok .

    In our charter of rights and freedoms it guarantees against discrimination , except where they are trying to even things out through programs like affirmative action . This is I believe can be ambiguous in a fast changing world . Previously disadvantaged groups are not likely to let go of situation which may be of benefit . But it is the law of the land.

    From the Charter of Rights and Freedoms;

    Equality before and under law and equal protection and benefit of law


    15. (1) Every individual is equal before and under the law and has the right to the equal protection and equal benefit of the law without discrimination and, in particular, without discrimination based on race, national or ethnic origin, colour, religion, sex, age or mental or physical disability.

    Affirmative action programs


    15. (2) Subsection (1) does not preclude any law, program or activity that has as its object the amelioration of conditions of disadvantaged individuals or groups including those that are disadvantaged because of race, national or ethnic origin, colour, religion, sex, age or mental or physical disability.

    Text from the Department of Justice Canada.

    Can "under aged" vote? Age discrimination.

    Sometimes I've thought that 'youth' should be allowed to vote at, say age 9 or 10, or upon passing some level of comprehension even if they are only say 6 years old (but cognitively advanced). Maybe give them 1/2 vote or some discounted value to appease the fearful. This might lead to far more youth growing older and actually voting at all.


    Electoral Rights: Charter of Rights and Freedoms-prb0850e

    "Canada was generally accepted to be a democratic society – with a well-developed body of election law – prior to the passing of the Charter. Consequently, some limits on democratic rights (such as residential or age qualifications) may well be considered “prequalified” or inherent in section 3 itself."


    http://www.parl.gc.ca/Content/LOP/Re.../prb0850-e.htm

    .
    Last edited by KC; 10-11-2013 at 08:42 PM.

  11. #11

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Gemini View Post
    Sure, it's for intolerant people like the ones mentioned in this article who have committed honour killings.

    http://www.canada.com/life/Honour+ki...638/story.html

    It's unfortunate that these characters spoil it for all the peaceful Muslims that do want to make Canada their home.

    It's also worth saying that honour killings are more of a 'religious' killing. In Canada the judicial law over rides the laws of religion. In some countries that is not the case.
    So why don't we call many more of the domestic murders honour killings? Or some jealous boyfriend /ex-boyfriend goes and kills some poor girl because the kid feels he's been humiliated when she looked at some other guy. Temporary insanity? To me it's just another honour killing. We just don't want to call it that and prefer to be able to point to an unpopular religion as the cause.

  12. #12

    Default

    Usually honour killings are pre planned well ahead. They also involve several family members that conspire to the killing. A lot of the time there is no stigma from the community to a family member or members who do the killing. They also show no guilt for what they have done. As long as the family honour is restored all is well. Families may kill their daughters if they think they are becoming too 'westernized' or seen talking to boys not of their liking. They can kill because their offspring want to marry someone not of their liking.
    Good article here on it:
    http://www.bbc.co.uk/ethics/honourcr...honour_1.shtml
    Last edited by Gemini; 10-11-2013 at 09:50 PM.
    Gone............................and very quickly forgotten may I add.

  13. #13

    Default

    Another point of discrimination that is usually under the radar and is usually subtle is weight discrimination. There's a group of people who constantly get ridiculed for no good cause.
    Gone............................and very quickly forgotten may I add.

  14. #14
    C2E Super Addict
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    Beautiful BC
    Posts
    1,657

    Default

    Discrimination is a function of the human condition. Some people like to assume it doesn't apply to them, but that's essentially just down to egotistical self delusion.
    "The only really positive thing one could say about Vancouver is, it’s not the rest of Canada." Oink (britishexpats.com)

  15. #15

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by expat View Post
    Discrimination is a function of the human condition. Some people like to assume it doesn't apply to them, but that's essentially just down to egotistical self delusion.
    Sanctioned discrimination by sex, such as the separation of male and female sports teams seems to be a factor of the human condition (sex) but how much of this separation relates to ego?

    If you're female and want to become a priest...
    Last edited by KC; 11-11-2013 at 07:41 AM.

  16. #16

    Default

    The local viewpoint:

    Appendix 2: Case law on reasonable and justifiable discrimination
    http://www.albertahumanrights.ab.ca/...scrim_app2.asp

    Many cases are listed above. Here's one:

    "collective agreement-gender requirement-BFOQ-role of collective agreement

    The respondent, when hiring an attendant to care for elderly male patients, considered only male candidates. It then hired a man who was not a member of the bargaining unit, while a woman who was a member was turned down. The collective agreement required that there be no discrimination on the basis of gender in hiring, and that union members were to be hired ahead of external candidates. The Supreme Court of Canada found that the employer's gender requirement was a bona fide occupational qualification ("BFOQ"). It also found that the collective agreement's non-discrimination clause did not interfere with the employer's power to set a BFOQ, and thus did not amount to an attempt to contract out of the human rights legislation."
    Last edited by KC; 11-11-2013 at 07:54 AM.

  17. #17

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by AShetsen View Post
    Thinking whatever thoughts and harboring whatever feelings is not in any way culpable.

    Communicating said thoughts and feelings to others is dangerous at best, and extremely, punishably rude at worst.

    Actually doing something discriminatory is sub-human. We should be above that.
    On point yet again.
    youtube.com/BrothersGrim
    facebook.com/BrothersGrimMusic

  18. #18
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    City of Champions
    Posts
    7,463

    Default

    My mom hated garlic, as such being the way I was raised we didn't eat a lot of food with garlic it. So because curry has quite a bit of garlic I don't really care for it. Does this mean I'm racist? No, I just tend to avoid Indian food because of it.

    I try not to discriminate but I also think preferential treatment to people because they are a minority is wrong too. I'd hire the best person qualified for the job based on their skills (education, experience, communication abilities).

    I understand certain jobs you have to consider the person, personal care attendants are a good example, some people prefer to have someone of the same sex treat or help them. Some jobs you need to have physical strength to do the job, that is a reality which tends to lead men to the more physical jobs rather than women, I can accept this.

  19. #19
    highlander
    Guest

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Gemini View Post
    Another point of discrimination that is usually under the radar and is usually subtle is weight discrimination. There's a group of people who constantly get ridiculed for no good cause.
    It's also discrimination to give overweight people an extra seat on an airplane, but deny the same for others. And not giving the bulkhead and exit rows eats to tall people for free.
    It's not really a bad thing, but it is discrimination.

    So are affirmative action programs, and targeted social programs for immigrants, low income neighbourhoods, or specific age groups. Also generally not bad things.

  20. #20
    highlander
    Guest

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by AShetsen View Post
    Thinking whatever thoughts and harboring whatever feelings is not in any way culpable.

    Communicating said thoughts and feelings to others is dangerous at best, and extremely, punishably rude at worst.

    Actually doing something discriminatory is sub-human. We should be above that.
    Discriminating thoughts are not ( necessarily) hatred, and discrimination is not (necessarily) persecution.

    There is still need for laws, because some reasonable personal discriminations, like renting a property to whomever I like, can become significant problems -persecution, even - when they are repeated by a large proportion of a community against the same group(s).

  21. #21

    Default

    I don't like the taste of certain foods, certain colour combinations in fashion, and certain religions. Why are 2 of those 3 ok, but not other? Discriminate all you want, but keep it to yourself.
    "Men never do evil so completely and cheerfully as when they do it from religious conviction" - Blaise Pascal

  22. #22

    Default

    Having a discriminating taste is supposed to be a virtue.
    Advocating a better Edmonton through effective, efficient and economical transit.

  23. #23

    Default

    I don't care how racist or discriminatory someone is, just as long as they are an outwardly nice person and not a **** to anyone else. In fact, I would really like to see a movement, where instead of asking for equality or protection for a specific group, to instead simply fight hard to encourage everybody not to be a **** to each other. Because really, that's all we need in order to be a fair and functional society.

    You don't like blacks, hispanics, men, women, alcoholics, caucasians, smokers, children, seniors, the disabled, the Irish, or whoever/whatever else? Fine - you can keep those feelings, just as long as you keep those prejudices to yourself and are not a **** to anyone else.

    This works beautifully in Japan, where despite the fact that they are a deeply xenophobic society, they still will bow and show outward respect to everyone while in public, despite personal prejudices.

  24. #24

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Komrade View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by AShetsen View Post
    Thinking whatever thoughts and harboring whatever feelings is not in any way culpable.

    Communicating said thoughts and feelings to others is dangerous at best, and extremely, punishably rude at worst.

    Actually doing something discriminatory is sub-human. We should be above that.
    On point yet again.
    Prior to the Olympics taking place China a few years ago, CBC radio was interviewing a CBC reporter about to go over there to cover the events. During the interview they were joking around and the interviewee said that maybe she would meet a nice Chinese guy. There was more to it than that which made the statement jump out in my mind as; 'Hey, now to me, that sounds racist if not ethnically or culturally discriminatory'. It was just one of those; Oh, now that's an interesting, though innocent, turn of phrase things.

    Anyway, get the point? Think: "Men prefer blondes", "Tall, dark and handsome"... society is full of such 'personal preferences'. If you looked at marriage patterns I think you might find people marrying ethnically similary people to themselves. (Of course, there's so many other factors at play, like religion, etc.) And it could all come down to the odds of who people meet within there community, but then... why do we have ethnic communities?

    As an adult male, I've had both male and female GPs (family doctors). You? Would you care? I didn't - except once (just a bit of human nature in my mind, but I didn't translate that trepidation into discriminatory action/inaction. So that's ok?)

    .
    Last edited by KC; 12-11-2013 at 03:24 PM.

  25. #25

    Default

    Let's not descend into the usual legalistic hair-splitting.

    Personal preference and discrimination are in no way similar.

    Just as a bias is not a prejudice.

  26. #26
    C2E Super Addict
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    Beautiful BC
    Posts
    1,657

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by AShetsen View Post
    Let's not descend into the usual legalistic hair-splitting.

    Personal preference and discrimination are in no way similar.

    Just as a bias is not a prejudice.
    noun
    noun: bias; plural noun: biases
    1.
    inclination or prejudice for or against one person or group, especially in a way considered to be unfair.
    "there was evidence of bias against black applicants"
    "The only really positive thing one could say about Vancouver is, it’s not the rest of Canada." Oink (britishexpats.com)

  27. #27

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by AShetsen View Post
    Let's not descend into the usual legalistic hair-splitting.

    Personal preference and discrimination are in no way similar.

    Just as a bias is not a prejudice.
    I don't know what you call it but I see our society being filled with non-merit based biases and prejudices that give some an advantage and so disadvantage others.

    And for example why do we create, maintain and perpetuate labels called "race" when to me it seems people have long been on a continuum across the globe as populations have historically transitioned from one environment or region to another? (What the heck is "race" anyway? The second I first thought about it, it stopped being sensible to me.) Where it comes to legalistic hair splitting its because lawyers have to put word(s) on paper and then they spend years trying to acutely define what they initially thought was clear to all.

  28. #28

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Edmonton PRT View Post
    Having a discriminating taste is supposed to be a virtue.
    Yeah right. Ever dine out with those people? Just getting food on the table is a pain because they have to first ask their 50 questions. Is it canned, is it frozen, is it fresh, is it fresh and organic, is it fresh organic and grown within 100 km, not miles. What oil do you use to cook it?....

  29. #29
    First One is Always Free
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Edmonton, Canada
    Posts
    88

    Default

    When is discrimination ok?
    Only when we talk about soccer.

  30. #30
    C2E Hard Core Contributor
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Red Deer
    Posts
    2,561

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by expat View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by AShetsen View Post
    Let's not descend into the usual legalistic hair-splitting.

    Personal preference and discrimination are in no way similar.

    Just as a bias is not a prejudice.
    noun
    noun: bias; plural noun: biases
    1.
    inclination or prejudice for or against one person or group, especially in a way considered to be unfair.
    "there was evidence of bias against black applicants"
    "Full Definition of BIAS

    1
    : a line diagonal to the grain of a fabric; especially : a line at a 45 degree angle to the selvage often utilized in the cutting of garments for smoother fit
    2
    a : a peculiarity in the shape of a bowl that causes it to swerve when rolled on the green in lawn bowling
    b : the tendency of a bowl to swerve; also : the impulse causing this tendency
    c : the swerve of the bowl
    3
    a : bent, tendency
    b : an inclination of temperament or outlook; especially : a personal and sometimes unreasoned judgment : prejudice
    c : an instance of such prejudice
    d (1) : deviation of the expected value of a statistical estimate from the quantity it estimates (2) : systematic error introduced into sampling or testing by selecting or encouraging one outcome or answer over others
    4
    a : a voltage applied to a device (as a transistor control electrode) to establish a reference level for operation
    b : a high-frequency voltage combined with an audio signal to reduce distortion in tape recording
    — on the bias
    : askew, obliquely"

    Plus other fun stuff about bias: http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/bias

  31. #31
    C2E Continued Contributor
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Edmonton
    Posts
    1,435

    Default

    If people sugar coat everything and refuse to talk about the tough issues then we won't come up with answers. Look at the Idol No More movement. Almost every conversation stemming from that protest was labelled as racist and we weren't allowed to talk about it. We need to be allowed to discuss hard issues without being immediately labelled as a racist or bigot. Obviously I am not advocating clear attacks (verbal or otherwise) towards any groups. But when people are so quick to label others as racist even if all those people were doing was debating hard issues then I have a problem with that and nothing gets done.

  32. #32

    Default

    ^ We're a growing city and everyday people arrive here from a lot of old cultures where nothing like Edmonton's diversity and 'openness' existed and hence there may be a number of ingrained biases coming with them. I sure wonder what issues might be simmering if not brewing unnoticed. (Remember when the police said we didn't have a gang problem and then suddenly we did? Just one of the offshoots of growth in my mind. Possibly a failure on Edmonton's part to fully integrate and accept all immigrants into the 'fabric' of our city.)

    But that's just one form of discrimination. In Canada we have asymmetric rights where cultural heritage, 'majority' languages, native agreements, etc. have all served to create conditions of discrimination. In a sense, in Quebec it seems it's ok to discriminate in terms of language (signs etc.) - or is that for purely practical purposes maybe even anti-descriminatory in the sense that everyone is treated equally.


    .
    Last edited by KC; 14-11-2013 at 10:15 AM.

  33. #33

    Default

    Wouldn't this also be a case of legitimized age discrimination? What is it, denial of information or something?

    BBC News - PM rejects call to lower age of consent to 15

    "He said lowering the age to 15 might make teachers and other people who work with teenagers "feel on a firmer footing" about telling them where to get advice on issues like contraception and disease." ...

    "In England and Wales, the age of sexual consent for women has been set at 16 since 1885, when campaigners fought to raise it from 13 to prevent child prostitution."

    "Other countries have set the legal age at anything from 12 to 20."

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-24976929

  34. #34

    Default

    Calls to "confront" so-called "tough issues" are nothing more than damnable prejudice rearing its ugly head and demanding it be given the voice that that rightfully been taken away from it.

    Living in society means first of all exercising discretion in the name of the common good.

    If one cannot do that, one is in fact a social deviant and deserves to be treated as such.

    And get the bloody hell off the freedom-of-speech kick.

    It is not about "you", nor about the feelings inside that "you" should suppress but lack the decency and self-discipline to do so.

    Yes, I know I have spoken harshly.

    Deliberately so.

    What some derisively call political correctness is just the basic politeness we are, or must unequivocally be, indoctrinated with in order to live as something more than sociopathic maggots.

    Take it away and you quickly descend to the sickness of the Toronto mayor, of his demented nation of supporters, and in fact to the larger set of sociopaths nation-wide who have been destroying us for almost a decade.

  35. #35

    Default

    ^ I agree discretion is vital to society. Though you seem to be placing social order above all else when you say "deserves to be treated as such".

    In some countries there are a huge number of restrictions if not discriminatory laws due to religious beliefs etc.

    In my view society is often slow to adjust to unusual behaviour or ideas and as such calls all such behaviours as deviant. Eg. women driving in Saudi Arabia.

    Sociological Viewpoints: Definitions of Deviance
    http://deviance.socprobs.net/Unit_1/Page_1.htm
    Excerpt
    "Response Percent Mentioning

    Homosexuals 49
    Drug addicts 47
    Alcoholics 46
    Prostitutes 27
    Murderers 22
    Criminals 18
    Lesbians 13
    Juvenile delinquents 13
    Beatniks 12
    Mentally ill 12
    Perverts 12
    Communists 10
    Atheists 10
    Political extremists 10"



    Ie in the,past few days CBC played excerpts from its archives from 1960. Listening to jazz and going to jazz clubs was essentially deviant behaviour. 'Hanging out with beatniks...' . It was fascinating to hear the interviews of the day.


    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Beatnik
    Last edited by KC; 18-11-2013 at 12:41 PM.

  36. #36
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    edmonton
    Posts
    4,757

    Default

    And, of course, rock'n'roll was the 'devil's music'.
    Nisi Dominus Frustra

  37. #37

    Default

    ^ I like how back in 1965 only about 1 in 5 people saw murders as deviants but nearly 1 in 2 ranked alcoholics, drug addicts (not sure the difference) and gays as deviants.

    From that article...

    " a few of Simmons' respondents also placed such persons as career women, junior executives, girls who wear makeup, and know-it-all professors in the category of "deviant." "

    Note the big issue over semantics and definitions in that article.

    Today I wonder how many see addiction, etc. as potentially connected with ones genes.
    Last edited by KC; 18-11-2013 at 04:25 PM.

  38. #38

    Default

    On age 'discrimination', no matter what age they picked they still had to chose to discriminate based on an arbitrary age cut off.


    Lowering the National Voting Age to 18 | In His Own Words | Edward M. Kennedy

    "Although 18 - 21 year-olds are not subject to the same sort of discrimination in public services confronting Puerto Ricans in New York) the discriminations, actual and potential, worked against millions of young Americans in our society are no less real. We know that increasing numbers of Federal and state programs, especially in areas like education and manpower, are designed for the benefit of our youth. In connection with such approaches, we can no longer discriminate against our youth by denying them a voice in the political process that shapes these programs."

    http://tedkennedy.org/ownwords/event/voting_age


    Here in this situation below, I imagine a lot of people feel it's quite ok for the church to discriminate...

    Young Catholic Feminists Challenge Gender Discrimination at World Youth Days
    http://www.womensordination.org/content/view/118/42/
    Last edited by KC; 18-11-2013 at 04:45 PM.

  39. #39

    Default

    I read this on the weekend. A very interesting view or insight on the defence of a democracy...

    "My point is it didn’t happen out of the blue, it was the result of a deliberate political strategy to make this connection between democracy and the Danish..." - Bo Lidegaard

    See below:

    Why brave Danes risked their lives to help nearly every one of Denmark’s 8,000 Jews escape the Nazis | National Post

    Excerpts:

    "Q. Over most of occupied Europe, Jews were marked by the yellow star, the local police helped in roundups, the civil service often handled the “bureaucracy” of dealing with the “Jewish question.” Was it that no anti-Semitism existed in Denmark?

    A. It did exist prior to the war. You had the same stereotypes about how the Jews were supposed to be. But it was never of the Nazi dimension or like Eastern Europe. Denmark developed a notion that the real defence we had as a society against Nazism and communism was to rally behind democracy, which of course is incompatible with anti-Semitism. So all the ideas that went against democracy became defined as anti-Danish and anti-patriotic."

    "Q. When the Germans went door to door they were told by their overlords not to kick the doors in for fear of upsetting other Danes. That seems surreal. Nazis were not known for delicacy. At the same time the decency of the ordinary Dane completely threw the Germans off. Try to explain this to someone whose view of the Nazis involved brutal crushing of all resistance and mass murder.

    A. In the early 1830s it was enacted that we would no longer register what creed Danish citizens had. So there was no part of Danish legislation that allowed authorities to distinguish between citizens of different creeds. There were only two categories: Danish citizen or not. The Danes were decent for a reason. That’s the point of my book and why it’s created controversy in my country, because very often it’s portrayed as something that just happened out of the blue. My point is it didn’t happen out of the blue, it was the result of a deliberate political strategy to make this connection between democracy and the Danish and that turned it into a patriotic act."


    http://life.nationalpost.com/2013/11...ape-the-nazis/
    Last edited by KC; 18-11-2013 at 04:52 PM.

  40. #40

    Default

    But this is precisely my point. The Danes basically shut up about the discrimination (difference, whatever) between creeds, and bring this point up was considered, in just so many words, anti-social in Denmark.

    This is a classic case of political correctness.

    In Canada, on the other hand, we have a society in which, for better or worse, there are all sorts of splinter groups that are all nominally equal, just as in Denmark, but over the last little while (well, basically since the governing gods changed), political correctness gets the short shrift.

    Of course we are still "not supposed" to say we are uncomfortable with splinter groups XX, YY, etc. being among us, but people do say it all the time. They don't like them here, they object to them coming here, them want them sent back to the place where allied forces can bomb them at will, etc., etc. (Actually since the mid-nineties there have been several such splinter groups.)

    The Danish example proves completely why all such talk must be considered antisocial and actively, universally suppressed.

    If you fail to suppress it, then what do you propose to do about the splinter group?

    Do you exterminate them? OK, maybe not.

    Do you block further entry of this splinter group? Fine, whatever; but what do you do about the ones already here?

    Do you discriminate against them in law? Well, is creating underclasses really what you want for your own security?

    Or do you do nothing except talk, talk, talk, the good ol' Canadian BS way?

    Seems harmless -- except look where talk brought Europe to.

    That's all.

  41. #41
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Westmount, Edmonton
    Posts
    5,093

    Default

    "The Public Service of Canada is committed to building a skilled, diverse workforce reflective of Canadian society. As a result, it promotes employment equity and encourages candidates to indicate voluntarily on their application if they are a woman, an Aboriginal person, a person with a disability or a member of a visible minority group."

    Is this discrimination? Women are over-represented in the Canadian Government (54%), and have been for decades. Do they still need special consideration, explicit on the application, which serves to discourage those not on the list from applying? How does that increase diversity?
    aka Jim Good; "The sooner you fall behind, the more time you have to catch up." - Steven Wright

  42. #42
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Westmount, Edmonton
    Posts
    5,093

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by howie View Post
    And, of course, rock'n'roll was the 'devil's music'.
    And lets keep it that way!
    aka Jim Good; "The sooner you fall behind, the more time you have to catch up." - Steven Wright

  43. #43

    Default

    Should seniors receive discounts on purchases and services? Is that age discrimination? Anything wrong with that?

  44. #44

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Jimbo View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by howie View Post
    And, of course, rock'n'roll was the 'devil's music'.
    And lets keep it that way!
    Isn't it just antique old fogie music now?

  45. #45
    Addicted to C2E
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Edmonton
    Posts
    772

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Jimbo View Post
    "The Public Service of Canada is committed to building a skilled, diverse workforce reflective of Canadian society. As a result, it promotes employment equity and encourages candidates to indicate voluntarily on their application if they are a woman, an Aboriginal person, a person with a disability or a member of a visible minority group."

    Is this discrimination? Women are over-represented in the Canadian Government (54%), and have been for decades. Do they still need special consideration, explicit on the application, which serves to discourage those not on the list from applying? How does that increase diversity?
    As mentioned in my initial posting , this is one of the big problems with section 15 of the Charter . "In our charter of rights and freedoms it guarantees against discrimination , except where they are trying to even things out through programs like affirmative action . This is I believe can be ambiguous in a fast changing world . Previously disadvantaged groups are not likely to let go of situation which may be of benefit

    As each affected group is brought to a standing of equality, it would take a court ruling to define the new equilibrium . Good Luck with that.

  46. #46

    Default

    Women maybe are over represented in the Canadian Government because a high percentage of the jobs are clerical positions. Clerical positions have, for the most part, been dominated by women. This was especially true during the baby boomers height of employment. Most lower paying clerical jobs in the public/civic/provincial service(s) were done by women. Usually the higher paying managerial office positions went to the men. It seems to be changing though. More women are getting managerial positions and seem to be moving up the ranks. I know if I have to go to Service Canada it seems like there are more guys working the front lines. Same as hospitals, nursing was once thought of as a woman's vocation, but now it seems more men are going in for nursing. I have not heard of any pay discrimination in that group.
    Gone............................and very quickly forgotten may I add.

  47. #47

    Default

    ^ gains can easily evaporate until the situation is seen by pretty much everyone as normal. A risk we face in Canada is cultural and other beliefs that seek to undo equality gains. I'd guess this could happen through immigration that reintroduces with it hardened traditionally discriminatory beliefs.


    Gender and finance: Discrimination abounds | The Economist

    "GENDER-BASED financial exclusion is deeply ingrained across the world. According to a recent paper* by the World Bank more than 1.3 billion women are "largely outside the formal financial system"."

    http://www.economist.com/blogs/freee...er-and-finance
    Last edited by KC; 21-11-2013 at 08:54 PM.

  48. #48
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    edmonton
    Posts
    4,757

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by KC View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Jimbo View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by howie View Post
    And, of course, rock'n'roll was the 'devil's music'.
    And lets keep it that way!
    Isn't it just antique old fogie music now?
    Of course it is NOW. Just as your current music will become, and some future tyro will echo your comment.
    Nisi Dominus Frustra

  49. #49
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    edmonton
    Posts
    4,757
    Nisi Dominus Frustra

  50. #50
    C2E Hard Core Contributor
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Grandin 2014--, Garneau 2012-2014, North Downtown 2006-2012
    Posts
    3,242

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by howie View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by KC View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Jimbo View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by howie View Post
    And, of course, rock'n'roll was the 'devil's music'.
    And lets keep it that way!
    Isn't it just antique old fogie music now?
    Of course it is NOW. Just as your current music will become, and some future tyro will echo your comment.
    Whenever I encounter a goth type teenager looking all rebellious, I can't repress a gentle smile. I remember when that look started and I was young then (I'm 60 now). I never tell them that their parents (or grandparents) might have been dressing like that when they were young.

    Eve

  51. #51
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    edmonton
    Posts
    4,757

    Default

    LOL! My kids get a huge chuckle out of old photos of me (and, no, I'm not posting them here). I was yer quintessential Mod in the days of Mods and Rockers. And yes, I had the Lambretta with chrome engine panels, tassels on the handlebars, and Union Jacks fluttering from the six foot aerial at the back. Gawdddddddd!
    Nisi Dominus Frustra

  52. #52

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Hull534 View Post
    My gut says that it is never Ok .

    In our charter of rights and freedoms it guarantees against discrimination , except where they are trying to even things out through programs like affirmative action . This is I believe can be ambiguous in a fast changing world . Previously disadvantaged groups are not likely to let go of situation which may be of benefit . But it is the law of the land.

    From the Charter of Rights and Freedoms;

    Equality before and under law and equal protection and benefit of law


    15. (1) Every individual is equal before and under the law and has the right to the equal protection and equal benefit of the law without discrimination and, in particular, without discrimination based on race, national or ethnic origin, colour, religion, sex, age or mental or physical disability.

    Affirmative action programs


    15. (2) Subsection (1) does not preclude any law, program or activity that has as its object the amelioration of conditions of disadvantaged individuals or groups including those that are disadvantaged because of race, national or ethnic origin, colour, religion, sex, age or mental or physical disability.

    Text from the Department of Justice Canada.

    Men can often remove their shirts in public but women often can't. Your thoughts? Community standards? Just an excuse to discriminate and sound legit about it?

    Topless'ness - Connect2Edmonton
    http://www.connect2edmonton.ca/forum...ad.php?t=34681

  53. #53
    First One is Always Free
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Edmonton, Canada
    Posts
    88

    Default

    Happy holidays: inclusive
    Merry Christmas: Discrimation
    Is discrimination ok? I do not know.
    I guess only when we talk soccer is ok.

  54. #54

    Default



    Watchdog deems phrase 'Happy Holidays' extremely offensive | This is That with Pat Kelly and Peter Oldring | CBC Radio
    http://www.cbc.ca/thisisthat/blog/20...ely-offensive/

    Excerpt:
    In her interview with Pat Kelly, spokesperson for the CAA, Sharon Coyle said:

    "First off, to assume someone is actually happy is obscenely offensive. Secondly, to speculate that a person is on holiday is equivalent to slapping them in the face."

    To hear what Sharon Coyle suggests you use as a seasonal greeting instead click LISTEN."


  55. #55

    Default

    This about says it all...........

    https://fbcdn-sphotos-f-a.akamaihd.n...35694290_n.jpg
    Gone............................and very quickly forgotten may I add.

  56. #56
    C2E Super Addict
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    Beautiful BC
    Posts
    1,657

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by MrOilers View Post
    I don't care how racist or discriminatory someone is, just as long as they are an outwardly nice person and not a **** to anyone else. In fact, I would really like to see a movement, where instead of asking for equality or protection for a specific group, to instead simply fight hard to encourage everybody not to be a **** to each other. Because really, that's all we need in order to be a fair and functional society.

    You don't like blacks, hispanics, men, women, alcoholics, caucasians, smokers, children, seniors, the disabled, the Irish, or whoever/whatever else? Fine - you can keep those feelings, just as long as you keep those prejudices to yourself and are not a **** to anyone else.

    This works beautifully in Japan, where despite the fact that they are a deeply xenophobic society, they still will bow and show outward respect to everyone while in public, despite personal prejudices.
    “Sincerity - if you can fake that, you've got it made.” ― George Burns
    "The only really positive thing one could say about Vancouver is, it’s not the rest of Canada." Oink (britishexpats.com)

  57. #57

    Default

    The human race is slowly getting less prejudice but to a degree evolution played a part in prejudice. Since we have been able to walk upright and interacted we have been taught to be wary of strangers, scared of things that are different, leery of changes. Sometimes that can work to an individuals advantage but society has evolved that we are now interdependent.
    Gone............................and very quickly forgotten may I add.

  58. #58

    Default

    BBC News - Should 16-year-olds get the vote following referendum?

    "Scottish First Minister Alex Salmond has called for the voting age in UK elections to be lowered to 16 by the 2015 general election. Labour leader Ed Miliband has said his party would give all 16 and 17-year-olds the vote. So should the voting age be lowered?"
    ...

    "There is not a shred of evidence for arguing now that 16 and 17-year-olds should not be allowed to vote."...

    http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-29327912

  59. #59
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    City of Champions
    Posts
    7,463

    Default

    This alone is enough of a shred of evidence ...

    http://www.musicmetric.com/2010/05/s...justin-bieber/

  60. #60
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Westmount, Edmonton
    Posts
    5,580

    Default

    To the original post, discrimination is OK when it's relevant.

    For lowering the voting age I have some reservations. Are we also going to lower the eligibility age for holding office? Does it make sense for people who can not hold office to vote for those who will hold office. I will acknowledge the age of 18 is arbitrary I think if we were to lower it for voting it would be worth considering lowering the age of majority in general.

    "For every complex problem there is an answer that is clear, simple, and wrong"

  61. #61

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Paul Turnbull View Post
    To the original post, discrimination is OK when it's relevant.

    For lowering the voting age I have some reservations. Are we also going to lower the eligibility age for holding office? Does it make sense for people who can not hold office to vote for those who will hold office. I will acknowledge the age of 18 is arbitrary I think if we were to lower it for voting it would be worth considering lowering the age of majority in general.
    One option, lower it but give them 1/2 a vote.
    1/8 a vote if a Bieber fan.

    Top 10 Subtler Forms of Discrimination
    http://listverse.com/2011/09/24/top-...iscrimination/


    ~
    Last edited by KC; 25-09-2014 at 06:45 PM.

  62. #62

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by KC View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Paul Turnbull View Post
    To the original post, discrimination is OK when it's relevant.

    For lowering the voting age I have some reservations. Are we also going to lower the eligibility age for holding office? Does it make sense for people who can not hold office to vote for those who will hold office. I will acknowledge the age of 18 is arbitrary I think if we were to lower it for voting it would be worth considering lowering the age of majority in general.

    One option, lower it but give them 1/2 a vote.
    1/8 a vote if a Bieber fan.

    Top 10 Subtler Forms of Discrimination
    http://listverse.com/2011/09/24/top-...iscrimination/


    ~
    I got a kick out of hearing this...


    Democracy Hacks: Should children have a vote?
    Wednesday, December 10, 2014

    Excerpt:
    "He points to historic restrictions on voting that allowed only men, and in some cases only men who owned property, to cast a ballot. He says allowing children a say in the political process could be seen as the next evolution of our electoral system.

    How would it work?..."

    http://www.cbc.ca/the180/excerpts/20...n-get-to-vote/




    Below the "Three-Fifths Compromise" was applied to slaves - an abhorrent measure also referred to as: "three fifths a man". By allowing children a fraction vote as I've toyed with, you'd have a three-fifths a full citizen issue. If applied without bias beyond age, and as a transitional rating, this might be acceptable though still discriminatory towards the "under-aged".

    Three-Fifths Compromise
    excerpt:
    "The debate was over if, and if so, how, slaves would be counted when determining a state's total population for legislative representation and taxing purposes. The issue was important, as this population number would then be used to determine the number of seats that the state would have in the United States House of Representatives for the next ten years, and to determine what percentage of the nation's direct tax burden the state would have to bear. The compromise was proposed by delegates James Wilson and Roger Sherman."

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Three-Fifths_Compromise
    Last edited by KC; 23-12-2014 at 10:22 PM.

  63. #63

    Default

    At about the 7 minute mark. The problem with underage voting...

    Comedy...

    Kevin Bridges on Scottish Independence

    https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=bRIQL4lvIqU

  64. #64

    Default

    With so much bitter truth splashing around the forum recently, heated debates and whatnot, here is a bit of entertaining read for this afternoon to cool off.

    Hiring Hot Nannies:

    But, we're delighted to report, there are definitely those who very much do want a hot nanny. Julie Swales tells of the unnamed but 'definitely A-list' Hollywood family who ask nannies to interview in bikinis - because they don't want the paparazzi to be able to distinguish between staff and family when they are on the beach. And it happens in the UK too: 'We'll often get photographs of the family, with their brief of wanting someone who'll fit in - and they're all gorgeous! They actually want someone good-looking,' explains Louise Taylor of Kensington Nannies. Although one mother said her nanny agency was very stern when she asked 'them to send me photos because I only wanted pretty ones. They said obviously they could not as it was not appropriate and that I was the first ever to ask this, as most wives insisted on unpretty nannies.' While an actress laughingly remarks that 'it's safer to get someone so hot that she's out of my husband's league', a Goldman Sachs wife explains: 'My nanny does the school run, and attends all the parent-teacher stuff that I can't - she's a face for our family, and I need her to be beautifully presented.'
    Source

  65. #65

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by FamilyMan View Post
    With so much bitter truth splashing around the forum recently, heated debates and whatnot, here is a bit of entertaining read for this afternoon to cool off.

    Hiring Hot Nannies:

    But, we're delighted to report, there are definitely those who very much do want a hot nanny. Julie Swales tells of the unnamed but 'definitely A-list' Hollywood family who ask nannies to interview in bikinis - because they don't want the paparazzi to be able to distinguish between staff and family when they are on the beach. And it happens in the UK too: 'We'll often get photographs of the family, with their brief of wanting someone who'll fit in - and they're all gorgeous! They actually want someone good-looking,' explains Louise Taylor of Kensington Nannies. Although one mother said her nanny agency was very stern when she asked 'them to send me photos because I only wanted pretty ones. They said obviously they could not as it was not appropriate and that I was the first ever to ask this, as most wives insisted on unpretty nannies.' While an actress laughingly remarks that 'it's safer to get someone so hot that she's out of my husband's league', a Goldman Sachs wife explains: 'My nanny does the school run, and attends all the parent-teacher stuff that I can't - she's a face for our family, and I need her to be beautifully presented.'
    Source
    Rare as it is, once in a while parents ask for a nanny that will be good for the kids.

  66. #66

    Default

    As a capitalist, I am not sure if using "discrimination" neutrality applies here. Better for him to stick to the core argument he makes against government measures.

    Business Insider, 16 Mar. 2016

    Fast-food CEO says he's investing in machines because the government is making it difficult to afford employees

    "They're always polite, they always upsell, they never take a vacation, they never show up late, there's never a slip-and-fall, or an age, sex, or race discrimination case," says Puzder of swapping employees for machines.

  67. #67

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by FamilyMan View Post
    As a capitalist, I am not sure if using "discrimination" neutrality applies here. Better for him to stick to the core argument he makes against government measures.

    Business Insider, 16 Mar. 2016

    Fast-food CEO says he's investing in machines because the government is making it difficult to afford employees

    "They're always polite, they always upsell, they never take a vacation, they never show up late, there's never a slip-and-fall, or an age, sex, or race discrimination case," says Puzder of swapping employees for machines.
    Nothing new.

    My mother used to talk of the automat that Edmonton used to have downtown, probably in the 1940s or 1950s. I can't think of the name but it's an old idea with new technology.

  68. #68

    Default

    On acceptability / tolerance of age discrimination:


    Is Warren Buffett Still Relevant?
    Apr 26, 2019
    Laura RittenhouseContributor
    Leadership Strategy


    In our society, we categorize people on the basis of gender, race and age. The term “Ageism” was created in 1968 by Dr. Robert Butler to describe the “stereotyping of and discrimination against people because they are old.” And while bias attitudes about race and gender are common, they are also condemned by many. Not so with ageism. Just go to your local Hallmark card seller and see the birthday cards mocking older people.

    Sure, you have seen (even bought) cards making fun of age-related frailties, and how older people can’t change their minds or are forgetful. How true are these stereotypes?





    https://www.forbes.com/sites/laurari...till-relevant/


    April 19, 2019:
    https://www.nytimes.com/2019/04/26/h...ly-health.html



    Too old for your job, too young to stop working. How ageism can scuttle your retirement plans - National | Globalnews.ca

    “It’s a phenomenon financial planners are seeing more and more: workers in their mid-50s are laid off or given a buyout package and then run up against a wall trying to find another job.
    ...
    https://globalnews.ca/news/5105670/a...career-advice/


    Ageism may increase people's risk of ill-health, study finds
    Report suggests link between age-related discrimination and conditions such as arthritis
    Nicola Davis
    4 Apr 2019

    “Examples of recent discrimination included being threatened or harassed in the past year, and ever having been discriminated against by doctors or in hospital.”

    https://www.theguardian.com/science/...th-study-finds

    Interesting article below. Since I was a teen and then into the workforce I was always surprised at the prejudice against old people. I knew quite a few “old” people and so I knew that many of them were as or more capable or knowledgeable or skilled or something than many of the people my age.

    Then during this time discrimination against gays, other religions, etc. became totally intolerable and unacceptable yet some of the very same people calling out racism etc were hypocritically behaving the same way towards old people.


    Is Ageism the Last Socially Acceptable ‘Ism?’ A New Book Argues Yes | Chicago News | WTTW
    Nicole Cardos
    April 25, 2019

    ...
    “Temple Rocks makes the case for increased awareness about ageism and age discrimination in her new book, "I'm Not Done: It's Time to Talk About Ageism in the Workplace.” ...”


    More commonly, it’s the “make them so miserable they will quit” approach, which I’ve discussed previously. This can take many forms, such as excluding an older worker from some meetings all of a sudden, giving younger workers plum assignments, better sales territories, or better technology, and making an older worker feel forced to accept a role that isn’t a good fit. If there is a pattern of such behavior, it can be interpreted as age discrimination.

    Employers take this approach because they don’t want to fire the older worker and hope that either the older worker will solve the problem for them by quitting. Sometimes they use the “miserable job” as a place to put a worker they deem disposable. More often than not, this is an older employee. One gentleman I spoke with had this happen to him; in the back of ...

    This type of ageism is often preceded by psychological damage and general diminishment of the person. Back to my ever-so-wise attorney friend Sue Ellen, who observed:
    ...

    https://news.wttw.com/2019/04/25/age...ook-argues-yes





    Don't let anyone get away with ageism, author says | CBC News

    ...
    “Applewhite compared the fight against ageism with the women's movement of the 1960s and 1970s, when women began comparing notes.
    Until then, a woman who wasn't heard or hired considered these her own personal problems, when, in fact, they were collective problems that required collective action, she said.

    "It shouldn't be OK to discriminate on the basis of age any more than on the basis of sexual orientation or the colour of your skin, or anything else about ourselves that we cannot change," she said.

    If people are turned away from jobs because of age, then it's a political problem that also requires collective action.

    And seniors aren't the only people who face age discrimination, Applewhite said. The young run into it as well.

    "It could also be that someone is too young to possibly know their way around a certain task," she said. ...”

    https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/new-b...nior-1.4618334
    Last edited by KC; 28-04-2019 at 09:43 AM.

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •