> > So it must be defined as illegal in the law to be considered discrimination? > No, I'm saying it's confusing to use terminology that's also separately lega

> > So it must be defined as illegal in the law to be considered discrimination? > No, I'm saying it's confusing to use terminology that's also separately legal teminology to describe something. Well, you seem to argue that one should not use the term "discrimination" if it is not legally defined to be such, because that would be confusing. Let's assume a hypothetical situation in which the law did not state that you cannot discriminate based on sex/gender and the minimum wage law stated that woman have a lower minimum wage than men. Would you consider this to be gender discrimination? If yes, what are the fundamental differences between this hypothetical situation and the real world situation of lower minimum wages for younger people? Why would you consider one to be discriminatory and the other to not be? If no, then I have no further questions. We seem to have a very different understanding of what discrimination is. I for one would definitely consider this hypothetical example to be discrimination and obviously apply the same logic to the actual situation as well.