Classicaly...
skin colour; nationality; religion; sex; taste in music...
Currently...
smokers; car drivers; overweight people...
Next?...
alcohol (again)?; people who wear oange t-shirts?
Why do us humans always find it necessary to discriminate, persecute & abuse others?
Why does it always feel right at the time but look ridiculous in a historical context?
Why are we so radically opposed to anything different?
Why do we justify our discrimination & even claim that it was the abused persons fault that we abused them when we all know it isn't so?
Why do us humans discriminate?
Why do us humans discriminate?
-
Paddock - L60 Male Man Hunter - SM Tailor
Moegren - L53 Male Man Captain - SM Weaponsmith GM Woodworker
Paddreth - L60 Male Man Minstrel - SM Jeweller GM Cook
Skyros - L57 Male Man Loremaster - SM Scholar GM Farmer
Pauncho - L60 Male Hobbit Burglar - SM Armoursmith
-
Paddock - L60 Male Man Hunter - SM Tailor
Moegren - L53 Male Man Captain - SM Weaponsmith GM Woodworker
Paddreth - L60 Male Man Minstrel - SM Jeweller GM Cook
Skyros - L57 Male Man Loremaster - SM Scholar GM Farmer
Pauncho - L60 Male Hobbit Burglar - SM Armoursmith
-
[quote="OohhoO"]Classicaly...
skin colour]
It's a tough discussion to have because there are people who cry sexism, racism and so forth when it's not actually really sexism and racism, because of that the lines are blurred between when something really is discrimination and when it isn't.
I'd argue that a lot of it is primal tbh, I'm pretty sure humans just fear things that are different naturally to a large extent. It can also be down to greed and power, i.e. it could be beneficial for someone to keep certain groups of people down and so forth, or simply using them as a scapegoat for their own problems.
The other problem is of course should we ban all discrimination or should it sometimes be allowed? In the UK there was a scientific study that showed on average black people had smaller brains, of course this caused uproar and the researcher lost his job and so forth being branded as a racist. To me this seems particularly odd, some black men will say white men have smaller penises, and this is something that is often ignored, yet for anyone to mention that black men have smaller brains is somehow far more taboo. Is it really so wrong to point out differences in evolutionary traits? If you needed someone with a large brain (god knows why it would make a difference, this is just an example) you could take a white man over a black man and be shot down for discrimination. If you needed a guy with a 20" penis or whatever (porn star maybe ?) you could likely take a black guy and the white guy would have no case. Taking this further, is it also discrimination for the RAF to refuse people who are too tall because they wont fit in the cockpits properly? Is this not exactly the same thing? discrimination based on genetic traits much as the above? Of course, not all white men have small nobs like Heta and not all black men will have smaller brains because the data is based on averages, but for the sake of discussion I'm just basing it on the idea we're using Mr Average.
I don't think we can realistically look at discrimination properly until it is something that is in some ways accepted, and in other ways outright shot down - no one should be discriminated against in the colour of their skin, but if they are indeed physically different then isn't it more a case of who's the better applicant for the job rather than a case of discrimination?
I've seen cases where a female have cried sexism when they haven't been given a promotion over a man (female in question then took 6months off with "stress" and she wonders why she didn't get the job? Even ignoring this she was absolutely not the best applicant), this has led to a full on tribunal wasting hundreds of hours of peoples time and thousands and thousands of pounds, as it was a local goverment employee this is all tax payers money going to waste - surely we should have something in place to prevent such appalling abuses of the term discrimination? Just on a side note the guy who did get the job was actually gay - someone who probably really is more likely to be discriminated against in todays world where females tend to get treated in general better than homosexual men. This case isn't isolated either, we've had a case at our work where a wheel chair user took us to court over not getting a job claiming discrimination, the job was 2nd line tech. support where you'd need to drive around and carry heavy IT equipment up stairs and such, climb up to high mounted switch cabinets and so forth - someone that frankly could never do the job. Whilst I have sympathy for their disability I really struggle to have any sympathy for someone who applies for a job they're physically incapable of then tries to abuse the system to make some money out of it. Luckily said person's case was kicked out of court as they had in fact tried this on with many companies - applying knowing they were unsuitable then suing over it.
Unfair discrimination is something we need to stamp out, for example if the wheel chair user above was applying for a job they could physically do and did get turned down because they were in a wheel chair, this is unacceptable, likewise we can't have the Church discriminating against homosexuals for no valid reason other than their "belief", if I believe I should be allowed to kill Christians without penalty does that mean I really should be able to? On the other hand however I do really feel that there is such thing as fair discrimination, I think we have to accept that everyone has faults, no matter who they are, and if those faults make them a worse candidate for a job or so forth then so be it, just move on and apply something you're more suited to than any other candidate.
Whilst discrimination is something that is abused as a term to try and cheat your way through the system it's ironically going to continue - essentially discrimination fuels discrimination. It's just sad that those who really do suffer authentic cases of discrimination have to suffer in the meantime.
skin colour]
It's a tough discussion to have because there are people who cry sexism, racism and so forth when it's not actually really sexism and racism, because of that the lines are blurred between when something really is discrimination and when it isn't.
I'd argue that a lot of it is primal tbh, I'm pretty sure humans just fear things that are different naturally to a large extent. It can also be down to greed and power, i.e. it could be beneficial for someone to keep certain groups of people down and so forth, or simply using them as a scapegoat for their own problems.
The other problem is of course should we ban all discrimination or should it sometimes be allowed? In the UK there was a scientific study that showed on average black people had smaller brains, of course this caused uproar and the researcher lost his job and so forth being branded as a racist. To me this seems particularly odd, some black men will say white men have smaller penises, and this is something that is often ignored, yet for anyone to mention that black men have smaller brains is somehow far more taboo. Is it really so wrong to point out differences in evolutionary traits? If you needed someone with a large brain (god knows why it would make a difference, this is just an example) you could take a white man over a black man and be shot down for discrimination. If you needed a guy with a 20" penis or whatever (porn star maybe ?) you could likely take a black guy and the white guy would have no case. Taking this further, is it also discrimination for the RAF to refuse people who are too tall because they wont fit in the cockpits properly? Is this not exactly the same thing? discrimination based on genetic traits much as the above? Of course, not all white men have small nobs like Heta and not all black men will have smaller brains because the data is based on averages, but for the sake of discussion I'm just basing it on the idea we're using Mr Average.
I don't think we can realistically look at discrimination properly until it is something that is in some ways accepted, and in other ways outright shot down - no one should be discriminated against in the colour of their skin, but if they are indeed physically different then isn't it more a case of who's the better applicant for the job rather than a case of discrimination?
I've seen cases where a female have cried sexism when they haven't been given a promotion over a man (female in question then took 6months off with "stress" and she wonders why she didn't get the job? Even ignoring this she was absolutely not the best applicant), this has led to a full on tribunal wasting hundreds of hours of peoples time and thousands and thousands of pounds, as it was a local goverment employee this is all tax payers money going to waste - surely we should have something in place to prevent such appalling abuses of the term discrimination? Just on a side note the guy who did get the job was actually gay - someone who probably really is more likely to be discriminated against in todays world where females tend to get treated in general better than homosexual men. This case isn't isolated either, we've had a case at our work where a wheel chair user took us to court over not getting a job claiming discrimination, the job was 2nd line tech. support where you'd need to drive around and carry heavy IT equipment up stairs and such, climb up to high mounted switch cabinets and so forth - someone that frankly could never do the job. Whilst I have sympathy for their disability I really struggle to have any sympathy for someone who applies for a job they're physically incapable of then tries to abuse the system to make some money out of it. Luckily said person's case was kicked out of court as they had in fact tried this on with many companies - applying knowing they were unsuitable then suing over it.
Unfair discrimination is something we need to stamp out, for example if the wheel chair user above was applying for a job they could physically do and did get turned down because they were in a wheel chair, this is unacceptable, likewise we can't have the Church discriminating against homosexuals for no valid reason other than their "belief", if I believe I should be allowed to kill Christians without penalty does that mean I really should be able to? On the other hand however I do really feel that there is such thing as fair discrimination, I think we have to accept that everyone has faults, no matter who they are, and if those faults make them a worse candidate for a job or so forth then so be it, just move on and apply something you're more suited to than any other candidate.
Whilst discrimination is something that is abused as a term to try and cheat your way through the system it's ironically going to continue - essentially discrimination fuels discrimination. It's just sad that those who really do suffer authentic cases of discrimination have to suffer in the meantime.
- Moley:)
- Emerald Rider
- Posts: 641
- Joined: Tue Feb 08, 2005 12:00 pm
- Location: A connection of Tunnels in UK . Ready to take over the world with my mole-brethren!
Usually people fear what they can not comprehend.
Loktah level 50 Blade Master RR2 l7 :mwahaha:
Moleymoleymoley level 50 Mentalist RR4L5! :stir: *Magical Gesture*moley:
Darksaga level 50 Ranger RR7!! :ranger:
Mid/Glast
Haduken WL level 50 RR3 l7
Necronomicon BD RR2l6 Level 39
Darksaga Hunter rr1 l4 Bane of Albion 5670 kills! :mwahaha: level 24
Retired and Retarded
Master Of Spamming
Moleymoleymoley level 50 Mentalist RR4L5! :stir: *Magical Gesture*moley:
Darksaga level 50 Ranger RR7!! :ranger:
Mid/Glast
Haduken WL level 50 RR3 l7
Necronomicon BD RR2l6 Level 39
Darksaga Hunter rr1 l4 Bane of Albion 5670 kills! :mwahaha: level 24
Retired and Retarded
Master Of Spamming
Discrimination is where you base your decision on who to hire based on traits of the person which have no effect (or virtually no effect) on how well they can perform the job. This is even worse when those traits are beyond the person's control.Xest wrote: I don't think we can realistically look at discrimination properly until it is something that is in some ways accepted, and in other ways outright shot down - no one should be discriminated against in the colour of their skin, but if they are indeed physically different then isn't it more a case of who's the better applicant for the job rather than a case of discrimination?
'Discriminating' based on height would be perfectly reasonable for the air force if it did actually make a huge difference in performance. I have read that smaller people (and thus on average women) can handle high-G better because of the smaller difference between brain and heart.
If centrifuge test results result in a higher proportion of women passing than the proportion of women who applied, that wouldn't be discrimination. (OTOH, for something like the police and the army, it can be a good idea to try to match them to the proportion of the general population, even if this means sometimes picking a person who's other skills are not quite the best at the interview)
Also, even basing hiring decisions on skin colour is OK is some cases. Imagine a world where you have a film about South Africa where Nelson Mandela is played by a white actor because he was the most skilled actor who applied, and the studio was afraid of a discrimination lawsuit.
Allow a jury to give 3 verdicts in a discrimination caseI've seen cases where a female have cried sexism when they haven't been given a promotion over a man (female in question then took 6months off with "stress" and she wonders why she didn't get the job? Even ignoring this she was absolutely not the best applicant), this has led to a full on tribunal wasting hundreds of hours of peoples time and thousands and thousands of pounds, as it was a local goverment employee this is all tax payers money going to waste - surely we should have something in place to prevent such appalling abuses of the term discrimination?
- discrimination probably occured
- discrimination probably didn't occur
- a false discrimination was made, beyond reasonable doubt
If the 3rd verdict is given, the plantiff has to cover all court fees and/or can be sued. Another alternative is to allow the company to counter sue for liable or something like that.
One issue is that it might make people who are being discriminated against fear coming forward for fear of being hit with massive court costs.
Right, companies should be allowed to look at abilities that have a bearing on the job and if you haven't got them, you haven't got them and that isn't the company's fault.This case isn't isolated either, we've had a case at our work where a wheel chair user took us to court over not getting a job claiming discrimination, the job was 2nd line tech. support where you'd need to drive around and carry heavy IT equipment up stairs and such, climb up to high mounted switch cabinets and so forth - someone that frankly could never do the job. Whilst I have sympathy for their disability I really struggle to have any sympathy for someone who applies for a job they're physically incapable of then tries to abuse the system to make some money out of it. Luckily said person's case was kicked out of court as they had in fact tried this on with many companies - applying knowing they were unsuitable then suing over it.
There is a grey area when dealing with adding additional facilities to allow access for disabled. For example, if the job is sitting at a desk all day, then there is little reason someone in a wheelchair can't do it. However, the cost of putting in wheel chair access could be a high proportion of the amount the company would pay any 1 wheel chair bound person.
Are you refering to the Catholic Church's involvement with the adoption system ? I would say the solution is that a person must promise that they will not allow their person religous viewpoint to cloud their judgement before being allowed to handle adoption screening.Unfair discrimination is something we need to stamp out, for example if the wheel chair user above was applying for a job they could physically do and did get turned down because they were in a wheel chair, this is unacceptable, likewise we can't have the Church discriminating against homosexuals for no valid reason other than their "belief", if I believe I should be allowed to kill Christians without penalty does that mean I really should be able to?
There is no such thing as fair discrimination. If it is fair, then it isn't discrimination.On the other hand however I do really feel that there is such thing as fair discrimination, I think we have to accept that everyone has faults, no matter who they are, and if those faults make them a worse candidate for a job or so forth then so be it, just move on and apply something you're more suited to than any other candidate.
Prydwen
Lairiodd Level 50 Nightshade and Legendary Grandmaster Smith (1065) check prices here
Lairirian Level 50 Mana Mentalist and Legendary Spellcrafter (TDD)
Lairgreybark Level 50 Arb Animist
Lairmindlock Level 50 Bard (TDD)
Camlann
Lairthall Level 35+ Friar
Stocking one 99% of most of the useful spellcrafting gems at Houses 3304 and 3306
Over 150 gems at 99% stocked
Lairiodd Level 50 Nightshade and Legendary Grandmaster Smith (1065) check prices here
Lairirian Level 50 Mana Mentalist and Legendary Spellcrafter (TDD)
Lairgreybark Level 50 Arb Animist
Lairmindlock Level 50 Bard (TDD)
Camlann
Lairthall Level 35+ Friar
Stocking one 99% of most of the useful spellcrafting gems at Houses 3304 and 3306
Over 150 gems at 99% stocked
Humans are animals like the rest.
It's not fear, it's not greed, it's not power.
It's more like:
I belong to this type of flock. This is the flock I equalize with. This is my flock.If you are not in the same flock as me I will challange you(This can be done offensive or defensive).
Simple answer really.
(Don't take everything I write too seriously tho)
It's not fear, it's not greed, it's not power.
It's more like:
I belong to this type of flock. This is the flock I equalize with. This is my flock.If you are not in the same flock as me I will challange you(This can be done offensive or defensive).
Simple answer really.
(Don't take everything I write too seriously tho)
Mid/Lyonesse
Mermeria - Healer
Slakt - Thane
Alb/Avalon
Labbs - Cabalist
Labben - Cleric
Huggz - Infil
Mermeria - Healer
Slakt - Thane
Alb/Avalon
Labbs - Cabalist
Labben - Cleric
Huggz - Infil
- Lieva
- Emerald Rider
- Posts: 5689
- Joined: Sat Feb 05, 2005 11:00 am
- Location: On the redundancy train to freedom :D
- Contact:
that actually makes senceLabbe wrote:Humans are animals like the rest.
It's not fear, it's not greed, it's not power.
It's more like:
I belong to this type of flock. This is the flock I equalize with. This is my flock.If you are not in the same flock as me I will challange you(This can be done offensive or defensive).
Simple answer really.
(Don't take everything I write too seriously tho)
Lievaordiea x Eldritch
Peonchants x Enchanter
Hibernia
Peonchants x Enchanter
Hibernia
Well put, but it isn't quite that simple.Labbe wrote:Humans are animals like the rest.
It's not fear, it's not greed, it's not power.
It's more like:
I belong to this type of flock. This is the flock I equalize with. This is my flock.If you are not in the same flock as me I will challange you(This can be done offensive or defensive).
Simple answer really.
(Don't take everything I write too seriously tho)
Of course we all defend our flock, but why do flocks become aggressive with each other? Is it because the flock is frightened, greedy or power hungry? I actually think it's as you said in the other thread, because it's survival of the fittest flock!