3 ms·
Interesting thought experiment. This seems repugnant at face value. Would it be equally repugnant to have a scholarship restricted to Computer Science majors? H
by qq66 16y ago
Interesting thought experiment. This seems repugnant at face value. Would it be equally repugnant to have a scholarship restricted to Computer Science majors? How about a scholarship restricted to high academic achievers? What types of "discrimination" are OK? Where is the line drawn?
- sendos 16y agoIt's drawn at things you can change about you. You can become a Computer Science major, and you can study hard and become a high academic achiever. But you can't become a woman if you're not. EDIT: I assume it's clear that the above means "It's drawn at things you can change about you without resorting to surgery" and "you can't become a woman if you're not, without surgery"
- krakensden 16y agoyou can for legal purposes, and you can get pretty close physically as well.
- sendos 16y agoYes, but I hardly think that it's OK to ask people to undergo a sex-change operation to get a job (I do think it's perfectly OK to ask people to become good in a specific field to get a job in that field) And the general point stands, because many other things you can't change about yourself (like your race) shouldn't be the basis of discriminating for job positions.
- ojbyrne 16y agoI think, in law, that's not actually how it works. The operative phrase is "bona fide job requirements." for example if you're a fireman, it's acceptable to require that you be physically fit to some level. If you're a CS professor, you would have a harder time justifying such a requirement. That's an attribute that you can change. IANAL, etc.
- dtby 16y agoIt's drawn at things you can change about you. What makes this reasonable?
- rsheridan6 16y agoYou can't discriminate against protected groups - minorities, women, and, increasingly, gays. Anybody else is fair game.