3 ms·

Nah man, discrimination on immutable characteristics is bad no matter what. If we want equality we need to aim for equality, not just turning the wheel so the

• TylerE 3y ago
  I wouldn’t go quite that far. Are 5’ 5” people going to be able to sue the NBA? Height is h immutable characteristic.
  • Manuel_D 3y ago
    That's because in sports physical attributes are a bona fide occupational qualification. In the same vein actors can be hired based on their appearance. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bona_fide_occupational_qualification https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bona_fide_occupational_quali...
    • TylerE 3y ago
      GP was speaking in no-exception absolutes, though.
      • lovich 3y ago
        Nah, I was speaking with that level of nuance. None of those immutable characteristics are important for these positions
        • TylerE 3y ago
          If you don't want to be perceived as speaking in absolutes, maybe don't use language like "no matter what", when it turns out it DOES matter what.
          • lovich 3y ago
            If someone is referring to terms like institutional racism I'd expect a little bit of nuance on their part /shrug
            • dllthomas 3y ago
              You are expecting people to read nuance into your statement explicitly denying nuance. It's a relatively mild communication, pretty quickly cleared up, but pushing responsibility for it onto your readers seems poor form.
              • dllthomas 3y ago
                ... "miscommunication", I meant.
      • Manuel_D 3y ago
        Discrimination on the basis of protected class outside of bona fide occupational qualifications is absolutely illegal, though.
• dragonwriter 3y ago
  > discrimination on immutable characteristics is bad no matter what. Why? I feel like "immutable characteristics" is a thing people reach for as an attempt to generalize/rationalize things like "suspect classification" and other groupings of protected characteristics into a simple rule without understanding the rationale that goes into the thing they are generalizing, without a really good reason (and even though it doesn't fit the established categories; e.g., two of the four standard things that qualify as a "suspect classification" for government discrimination are mutable associations -- religion and alienage -- while the other two are, at least normally conceived as, immutable -- race and national origin.)