Civil Rights activism jumps the shark

DiscussãoPolitical Conservatives

Entre no LibraryThing para poder publicar.

Civil Rights activism jumps the shark

Este tópico está presentemente marcado como "inativo" —a última mensagem tem mais de 90 dias. Reative o tópico publicando uma resposta.

1enevada
Out 9, 2013, 12:59pm

Apparently, thirtysomething male Bronies are NOT a protected class in the workplace.

http://www.latimes.com/opinion/opinion-la/la-ol-mylittlepony-discrimination-righ...

Is this still America? : )

2southernbooklady
Out 9, 2013, 2:34pm

If you unpack that article, the question it asks is probably worth a real discussion: why is it okay for you be fired for any reason other than not doing your job? And why is it okay for you to not be hired because of any reason other than your competence or lack thereof?

Leaving aside convictions of felonies, etc., there are plenty of reasons that people are not hired because of things that arguably have nothing to do with their competence in the workplace-- how they look being a big one.

It suggests that as a society we place a great amount of importance on arguably superficial things.

3enevada
Out 9, 2013, 2:49pm

#2: Because there is no guaranteed "right to a job"

(yet).

4southernbooklady
Out 9, 2013, 3:12pm

The question has both a legal and a moral aspect to it.

5enevada
Out 9, 2013, 3:19pm

Not really. No one is morally or legally obligated to hire anyone.

6southernbooklady
Out 9, 2013, 3:38pm

I didn't suggest we were "obligated" to hire anyone. But when we are hiring, we are perhaps morally called not to reject people for unworthy reasons.

7enevada
Editado: Out 9, 2013, 3:53pm

Again, nope. Any reason at all beyond: age, disability, equal pay, genetic info, national origin, pregnancy, race, religion, retaliation, gender, and sexual harassment. That’s plenty. To further dilute the discriminatory claims to include arrested adolescence (or poor hygiene, dress, fetish, etc.) would counter any good the protected status offers.

8southernbooklady
Out 9, 2013, 4:02pm

or ugliness vs. prettiness? :) Which, despite the silly headline, was one question the article was asking.

It's something I've been aware of because I have a cousin who suffers from Bell's Palsy. It does not impede her in any way except that she does not look conventionally pretty. But this in itself turned out to be a liability getting a job in many places. So I find our society's obsession with image as an indicator of worth or value soemwhat problematic. Although granted I don't think its the kind of thing you'd fix with legislation.

9enevada
Out 9, 2013, 4:28pm

#8: yes, I'd agree that the real misfortune for your cousin is to be born into a society with an obsession with image as an indicator of worth or value, a misfortune we all share to varying degrees (worse, I am sure for your cousin than for the waitresses at Hooters, but then again, maybe not?)

10enevada
Dez 19, 2013, 10:50am

Activist Bronies and now Pajama Boy. 2013 has been a banner year for the beta-man-child:

http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2013/12/opinion-rich-lowry-obamacare-affo...