h2g2 The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy: Earth Edition

It depends how you describe discrimination, doesn't it?

I wouldn't put 'not being able to get a pram on a bus' as being discriminated against, unless buses had been specially designed to stop pram users from getting on. Otherwise, isn't that just bad design or bad planning, or a very full bus?

Of course, in an ideal world everyone's needs would be taken care of, and catered for. But sometimes I think 'I'm being discriminated against' is used as a kind of excuse - for instance a punk with green hair and a nose ring might say that they were discriminated against because they found it hard to get a job in their chosen career of medical receptionist. Is that discrimination against their lifestyle, or is it fair of the medical practise to ask for a clinical and professional work appearance on behalf of its patients?

After all if I wore a bikini to work I'd expect my employers to protest (plus plenty of passers-by! ) - I don't think saying it was a 'lifestyle' choice should be considered for a minute.

I think you're discriminating against punks by using a stereotype! I don't have green hair (it's very dark blue) and if I had a nose ring my parents would go ballistic. Plus everyone in school would beat me up for 'bein a stupid goth' as they would say. *just coz im gothic doesn't mean I'm stupid. I have learnt to deal with discrimination with the line you say i'm a freak like it's a bad thing.
e.g- youre hair looks like a wig- you say i'm a freak like it's a bad thing
Youre a stupid freak- you say i'm a freak like it's a bad thing
It works.

"I wouldn't put 'not being able to get a pram on a bus' as being discriminated against, unless buses had been specially designed to stop pram users from getting on. Otherwise, isn't that just bad design or bad planning, or a very full bus?"

Yes it's bad planning. The discrimination comes in the following way: suppose the "bad planning" inconvenienced only white able-bodied men - it would be corrected before it was implemented, and on the off chance that it wasn't there would be an uproar and it would get subsequently corrected whatever the cost. That's institutional or social discrimination rather than individual discrimination.

"Is that discrimination against their lifestyle, or is it fair of the medical practise to ask for a clinical and professional work appearance on behalf of its patients?"

Yes, it's discrimination by the employer on the behalf of the patients. There's no professional reason why someone shouldn't have a nose ring. The only reason to not allow people going into that job to have a nose ring is because people would be upset by it. That has everything to do with discrimination and nothing to do with professionalism.

"After all if I wore a bikini to work I'd expect my employers to protest..."

Yes, but employers are the most discriminatory people on the planet so you'd have to expect that.

Why don't we get rid of busses and go back to living in caves?
Why do all my conversations end up like this?
Why am I so dillusioned?

Hey Pope

"Why don't we get rid of busses and go back to living in caves?"

I dont live on a bus anyway and I'm certainly not gonna try a cave? What's the story? Is it the blue hair?

Byrnesnight from Spock

We should also have busses that don't discriminate against people who weigh 450 kg. They should have a crane attached to them for that purpose. And a person applying for the job as a bus driver should not be discriminated on, solely for the reason that he is blind. Give him a dog.

In many jobs, you should be expected to have a fairly neutral appearance. I wouldn't like to come into a bank and find the clerk is wearing his "F*ck The Rules" t-shirt that day. You need to make sure that the person is not giving an impression that will reflect badly on the company. Imagine If I decided not to shower anymore, and people started being able to smell me from 30 meters away. Do you still think it would be discrimination against my lifestyle if I couldn't get a job in a bakery? Sadly sometimes you have to cater to people's prejudice, and decide not to hire that satanist goth as the kindergarten teacher, since the children start crying when they see him.
But there are of course limits. There is something on the news at the moment about how elderly people demand that their carers should all be white people. And luckily it seems the goverment is willing to put the foot down and say that it is racism, they won't meet those demands. I think it just means those elders are from a time with more racism. But that is not a valid excuse, they need to open their eyes.

"We should also have busses that don't discriminate against people who weigh 450 kg. They should have a crane attached to them for that purpose. And a person applying for the job as a bus driver should not be discriminated on, solely for the reason that he is blind."

Oh please. Are you really trying to say this is equivalent or even similar to the examples Peta started this thread with? The 450kg person taking the place of the person with the pram and the blind bus driver taking the place of the receptionist with a nose ring?

"I wouldn't like to come into a bank and find the clerk is wearing his "F*ck The Rules" t-shirt that day."

Why ever not?

"Imagine If I decided not to shower anymore, and people started being able to smell me from 30 meters away. Do you still think it would be discrimination against my lifestyle if I couldn't get a job in a bakery?"

OK, this is the only sensible example you gave. But someone who smelled that bad would presumably be an actual health risk.

"Sadly sometimes you have to cater to people's prejudice, and decide not to hire that satanist goth as the kindergarten teacher, since the children start crying when they see him."

I bet they wouldn't. They'd probably think he was quite comical and fun. Anyway, all the goths I've ever met, which is not many to be sure, have been, despite appearances, very gentle and kind people - the perfect people for looking after little kiddies.

I think there is a sensible point behind what you and Peta are saying. You're saying that society is prejudiced, and that because of this fact, legislation that makes prejudicial discrimination on the behalf of employers would make life very difficult for them, and hence cause economic problems. This is a fair point. But rather than deducing that discrimination must be OK after all, I would say all this shows is that crude legislation is not the answer. In some cases, legislation is a good idea. In the US they have (I think they still have it although there are moves to get rid of it) a law which says that public buildings must be accessible by disabled people. Over here, we don't have that law and so disabled people are excluded from many things. However, in other cases legislation is probably not such a good idea. I can't think of any actual examples of such erroneous laws though. Possibly there aren't any.

"In some cases, legislation is a good idea. In the US they have (I think they still have it although there are moves to get rid of it) a law which says that public buildings must be accessible by disabled people. Over here, we don't have that law and so disabled people are excluded from many things."

The american Law is the ADA - americans with disabilities act.

The UK equivalent is the DDA - Disability Discrimination Act which was passed in 1995 (http://www.drc-gb.org/law/dda.asp) and is slowly coming into force. The physical access part is going to hit in October 2004 and is going to cause chaos - expect to see ramps and low level service desks and hearing aid loops being fitted anywhere and everywhere in the next few months.

However when it comes to buses all single deck buses have to be accessable by 2016 (yes you did read right - 13 years time) and double deckers by 2017. So that lady with her pram is likely to be struggling for a long time yet

If we'd said 'can't get my wheelchair on the bus' would that have been different? It was deliberately put that way to see if people thought it was ok that a person with a pram couldn't get on a bus, but not ok if they had a wheelchair. If it is, that's discrimination.

I hate shops that have the aisles so close together you can't get your buggy between them to look. If a buggy can't get in, how can a wheelchair? At least I could fold the buggy up and carry the child. It's still a shop/bus designed for the able-bodied only - which discrimainates against anyone who can't walk on their own.

The reasoning the shops would give is that the cost of renting more floorspace would be prohibitive...and that their staff would be more than willing to fetch things from down the aisles for a wheelchair using customer.

The fact that this means the customer can't browse and is under more pressure to buy is ignored (or at least will be until October 2004).

When it comes to pushchairs it's always been possible to get the average pushchair onto a bus...awkward but do-able. However the 2 great big steps and the narrow gap between the handrails makes it impossible to get a wheelchair (or double buggy) onto a standard bus.

The bus companies are currently complaining that wheelchair users aren't using the 15% of bus's which have been adapted. Strangely enough wheelchair users aren't interested in using a service which might leave them stranded in town with no accessible return bus, or dealing with the aggression from drivers unwilling or untrained to extend the ramp for them (http://www.disabilitynow.org.uk/search/z00_05_My/p5bus.htm)

I was thinking about this one last night. I think it's an interesting issue. I think the difference is choice. If a person is in a wheelchair they have absolutely no choice in the matter, so catering to their needs is an absolute essential for them to do anything at all.

If you're talking about getting a pram on a bus, is there a difference between entitled to expect to get a pram on or a fold-up pushchair? One is very practical, the other is nice for the baby, but *very* impractical for travelling. Isn't it fair to expect the person to make every effort to come to a reasonable compromise?

Otherwise couldn't you say that window cleaners were discriminated against because they can't get their ladders on a bus?

Lets just get rid of everything and go back to living in caves. We should all be Anarchists! Yeah
RULE ANARCHY!