|
Korean Job Discussion Forums
"The Internet's Meeting Place for ESL/EFL Teachers from Around the World!"
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
merkurix
Joined: 21 Dec 2006
Location: Not far from the deep end.
|
 Posted: Sat Aug 16, 2008 1:46 am Post subject: |
 |
|
So far the word discrimination has been mentioned many times and I agree with most posters that turning down women because they were fat was not illegal, but it was also probably not right either. There has been civil rights movements and legislation in American history (don't know what the situation in in the U.K. regarding civil rights history, so I will speak from a U.S. perspective) against discrimination based on gender (early 20th C.), race (60s) as well as religious, marital status, etc.
Discriminating against someone based on gender, race, religion, handicap, marital status, etc. can carry criminal and civil penalties as well as a high-profile backlash from the public and press.
Unfortunately for many, there doesn't seem to be much legislation or civil rights movements which makes it illegal to discriminate against ugly or fat-looking people at this time.
Perhaps this is the final civil rights frontier to overcome?
Lookism
There is already legislation pending to criminalize lookism in Massachusetts with the backing of a U.S. Congressman.
But as far as the U.K is concerned, it seems there is already some discussion going on about the issue.
Overweight, Underpaid
Until the spectre of discrimination against ugly and fat people is confronted on a massive political scale, all we can do is sympathize with the plight of the poor victims of the receiving end of such "aesthetic discrimination." |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
itaewonguy
Joined: 25 Mar 2003
|
| Posted: Sat Aug 16, 2008 6:59 am Post subject: |
|
|
| mindmetoo wrote: |
| Any private business should have the right to refuse service to anyone for any reason. Which is not to say the business was being ethical. |
really??? so you are saying then its more than fine to refuse black people just becuase they are black!? its ok to not hire an asian just becuase they are asian? wow! glad the majority of the world doesnt think as freely as you! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
thiophene
Joined: 15 Sep 2007
|
| Posted: Sun Aug 17, 2008 7:33 am Post subject: |
|
|
| itaewonguy wrote: |
| mindmetoo wrote: |
| Any private business should have the right to refuse service to anyone for any reason. Which is not to say the business was being ethical. |
really??? so you are saying then its more than fine to refuse black people just becuase they are black!? its ok to not hire an asian just becuase they are asian? wow! glad the majority of the world doesnt think as freely as you! |
All private businesses should have the right to choose who they wish to serve. Night clubs are picky, strip clubs are picky, restaurants and even the hotel industry hire according to looks. Look at the entertainment industry, it happens all the time. YOu want a restaurant who's trying to privide an authentic Morrocan experience to hire a Chinese person? I know one male strip club in toronto refuses women most nights of the week. Bummer I know!!! While it does sound unethical, I just think of the reverse...if the kkk were to hold some big dinner celebration at my restaurant Id refuse service and the laws in Canada support that. (i'm 99% sure  ) |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Hyeon Een
Joined: 24 Jun 2005
|
| Posted: Sun Aug 17, 2008 8:08 am Post subject: |
|
|
| itaewonguy wrote: |
| mindmetoo wrote: |
| Any private business should have the right to refuse service to anyone for any reason. Which is not to say the business was being ethical. |
really??? so you are saying then its more than fine to refuse black people just becuase they are black!? its ok to not hire an asian just becuase they are asian? wow! glad the majority of the world doesnt think as freely as you! |
Racial/ethnic discrimination is totally wrong.
With one exception.
Gypsies. It's 100% acceptable to refuse to hire someone because they're a gypsy. Thieving b@stards the lot of them. Ideally they'd be banned from all shops too.
(Some background: I used to work in a shop doing the night shift on my own. Gypsies would come in and openly and freely steal whatever they wished. This was fine by me, it wasn't my shop and was owned by a large corporation. I was told by my bosses not to confront them and leave them alone; they didn't want to risk me getting knifed.
HOWEVER, the gypsies are not only thieves but they're RUDE and disrespectful. I don't care if they steal from the shop, but do they HAVE to knock over display cases and hurl abuse at me while they do it? That's what really put me off them. One of the chick ones was kind of cute once though.
Oh, these were the Irish gypsies aka Knackers or Pikeys, not the Romani or New Age Traveller types. )
I want some legislation discriminating against gypsies! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Big_Bird
Joined: 31 Jan 2003
Location: Sometimes here sometimes there...
|
| Posted: Sun Aug 17, 2008 1:36 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Interesting. I had a lot of trouble with Irish 'travellers' - as they are called - when I worked in a pub in London. HOrrible. Changing nappies on the tables and leaving them there. Stealing. Harrassment. The pub being practically trashed by a group of them a few times. The most rude and disrepectful of all the customers I've ever had ANYWHERE - and screaming "Racist!!" when they couldn't have things their way (like getting served after 11 pm which was illegal).They were banned from most pubs in the area, but for some reason our manager let them in because he was desperate for business. I dreaded them. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Adventurer
Joined: 28 Jan 2006
|
| Posted: Sun Aug 17, 2008 8:40 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| merkurix wrote: |
So far the word discrimination has been mentioned many times and I agree with most posters that turning down women because they were fat was not illegal, but it was also probably not right either. There has been civil rights movements and legislation in American history (don't know what the situation in in the U.K. regarding civil rights history, so I will speak from a U.S. perspective) against discrimination based on gender (early 20th C.), race (60s) as well as religious, marital status, etc.
Discriminating against someone based on gender, race, religion, handicap, marital status, etc. can carry criminal and civil penalties as well as a high-profile backlash from the public and press.
Unfortunately for many, there doesn't seem to be much legislation or civil rights movements which makes it illegal to discriminate against ugly or fat-looking people at this time.
Perhaps this is the final civil rights frontier to overcome?
Lookism
There is already legislation pending to criminalize lookism in Massachusetts with the backing of a U.S. Congressman.
But as far as the U.K is concerned, it seems there is already some discussion going on about the issue.
Overweight, Underpaid
Until the spectre of discrimination against ugly and fat people is confronted on a massive political scale, all we can do is sympathize with the plight of the poor victims of the receiving end of such "aesthetic discrimination." |
The women could definitely sue. This is not discrimination simply based on women being fat, but it is also gender discrimination which should upset women of all sizes and men who are fair-minded. Men who were overweight were not targeted. The establishment was being extremely sexist, and I think they realized it later. They did apologize which is good. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
merkurix
Joined: 21 Dec 2006
Location: Not far from the deep end.
|
| Posted: Sun Aug 17, 2008 11:58 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Adventurer wrote: |
| merkurix wrote: |
So far the word discrimination has been mentioned many times and I agree with most posters that turning down women because they were fat was not illegal, but it was also probably not right either. There has been civil rights movements and legislation in American history (don't know what the situation in in the U.K. regarding civil rights history, so I will speak from a U.S. perspective) against discrimination based on gender (early 20th C.), race (60s) as well as religious, marital status, etc.
Discriminating against someone based on gender, race, religion, handicap, marital status, etc. can carry criminal and civil penalties as well as a high-profile backlash from the public and press.
Unfortunately for many, there doesn't seem to be much legislation or civil rights movements which makes it illegal to discriminate against ugly or fat-looking people at this time.
Perhaps this is the final civil rights frontier to overcome?
Lookism
There is already legislation pending to criminalize lookism in Massachusetts with the backing of a U.S. Congressman.
But as far as the U.K is concerned, it seems there is already some discussion going on about the issue.
Overweight, Underpaid
Until the spectre of discrimination against ugly and fat people is confronted on a massive political scale, all we can do is sympathize with the plight of the poor victims of the receiving end of such "aesthetic discrimination." |
The women could definitely sue. This is not discrimination simply based on women being fat, but it is also gender discrimination which should upset women of all sizes and men who are fair-minded. Men who were overweight were not targeted. The establishment was being extremely sexist, and I think they realized it later. They did apologize which is good. |
I absolutely agree that they could sue, but they will probably not win on grounds of sexual discrimination. Their argument might fall apart if the club proves they have let plenty of women in -- just not the 'fat' ones. Not gender discrimination--but surely it was discrimination. Gender discrimination has had a movement, the women (and some men too) felt the pain and they took action and this is why it is taboo and unkosher to discriminate on gender grounds.
But the women were discriminated against for their appearance, and there doesn't seem to be a law that criminalizes looks discrimination. At least not yet. The establishment didn't break any laws, but they weren't in the right either to deny them entry. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
hubba bubba
Joined: 24 Oct 2006
|
| Posted: Mon Aug 18, 2008 1:53 am Post subject: |
|
|
This is in the areas of "stuff I don't like but have to accept."
There are a lot of things I personally disagree with, but understand that my beliefs should not infringe on the rights of others. I am against abortion, but I don't think my view should exclude others from a choice. I am against guns (except if I can carry them as a teacher, haha), but I understand the second amendment, so I think we should have legal sales. I am against discrimination, but I think if a business owner chooses to not sell to a a group of people, it is within his pervy little right to do so. I am not a homosexual, but I don't think that should bar two people from legally documenting their lifetime commitment of love through marriage.
We need more freedom, and less people telling us what we can and can't do. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
itaewonguy
Joined: 25 Mar 2003
|
| Posted: Mon Aug 18, 2008 5:10 am Post subject: |
|
|
| thiophene wrote: |
All private businesses should have the right to choose who they wish to serve. Night clubs are picky, strip clubs are picky, restaurants and even the hotel industry hire according to looks. Look at the entertainment industry, it happens all the time. YOu want a restaurant who's trying to privide an authentic Morrocan experience to hire a Chinese person? I know one male strip club in toronto refuses women most nights of the week. Bummer I know!!! While it does sound unethical, I just think of the reverse...if the kkk were to hold some big dinner celebration at my restaurant Id refuse service and the laws in Canada support that. (i'm 99% sure ) |
lets not compare the KKK or NEO nazis having dinner in your restaurant compared to a girl trying to have a drink with her friends in a club!
BIG difference! (no pun) 
hiring workers sure! of course you are going to hire trained staff or ethnic staff for your place if you need to for your restaurant! but you shouldnt refuse a man from eating in your restaurant just becuase he is morrocan! we dont want the day when its LEGAL to have signs out the front of your place saying
NO ASIANS, NO FAT WOMEN, and NO BLACKS ALLOWED!
once the world goes down that path again it will just slow the progress right down!
signs like management has the right to refuse entry is ok..
but directly telling someone they are being refused for being over weight, asian or black is not fair! and that kind of abuse should not be tollerated!
the bar should be fined or something.. its unethical and laws need to be passed to prevent this kind of abuse!
WHY CANT WE ALL JUST GET ALONG!!!
 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
thiophene
Joined: 15 Sep 2007
|
| Posted: Mon Aug 18, 2008 7:46 am Post subject: |
|
|
| itaewonguy wrote: |
| thiophene wrote: |
All private businesses should have the right to choose who they wish to serve. Night clubs are picky, strip clubs are picky, restaurants and even the hotel industry hire according to looks. Look at the entertainment industry, it happens all the time. YOu want a restaurant who's trying to privide an authentic Morrocan experience to hire a Chinese person? I know one male strip club in toronto refuses women most nights of the week. Bummer I know!!! While it does sound unethical, I just think of the reverse...if the kkk were to hold some big dinner celebration at my restaurant Id refuse service and the laws in Canada support that. (i'm 99% sure ) |
lets not compare the KKK or NEO nazis having dinner in your restaurant compared to a girl trying to have a drink with her friends in a club!
BIG difference! (no pun)
hiring workers sure! of course you are going to hire trained staff or ethnic staff for your place if you need to for your restaurant! but you shouldnt refuse a man from eating in your restaurant just becuase he is morrocan! we dont want the day when its LEGAL to have signs out the front of your place saying
NO ASIANS, NO FAT WOMEN, and NO BLACKS ALLOWED!
once the world goes down that path again it will just slow the progress right down!
signs like management has the right to refuse entry is ok..
but directly telling someone they are being refused for being over weight, asian or black is not fair! and that kind of abuse should not be tollerated!
the bar should be fined or something.. its unethical and laws need to be passed to prevent this kind of abuse!
WHY CANT WE ALL JUST GET ALONG!!!
|
so is lying about it ok? just put up a generic sign and refuse entry without an explaination? I think it's easy for us to say we shouldn't discriminate who we choose to service but once it's your service and your ass on the line, you want the right to choose how to run it (well whatever's within the safety bylaws, etc.) |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ED209
Joined: 17 Oct 2006
|
| Posted: Mon Aug 18, 2008 8:15 am Post subject: |
|
|
Ok, who here doesn't discriminate against fat chicks?
Most clubs will aspire to the prejudices of their most common client�le. This is no better than the Hagwon owner who's scared to hire a black person because of what parents might think. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
nateium
Joined: 21 Aug 2006
Location: Seoul
|
| Posted: Mon Aug 18, 2008 5:05 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| itaewonguy wrote: |
NO FAT WOMEN
WHY CANT WE ALL JUST GET ALONG!!!
|
I'm not sure that at the moment a "NO FAT WOMEN" sign would actually be illegal. At least not a "NO FAT PEOPLE" sign. Many posters in this thread seem to be confused about illegal/legal vs right and wrong.
What laws exist at the moment to protect the rights of the obese? in what circumstances?
Besides, obese is a lifestyle choice. ASian, Black, female is not. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Big_Bird
Joined: 31 Jan 2003
Location: Sometimes here sometimes there...
|
| Posted: Mon Aug 18, 2008 8:28 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Perhaps these women should head off to Mt Isa in Australia:
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/australasia/outback-mayor-urges-ugly-women-to-move-901830.html
| Quote: |
The mayor of an outback mining town in deepest Queensland has angered Australia's womenfolk by suggesting that those who are "beauty disadvantaged" might head to Mount Isa.
Even in a society where testosterone-fuelled, sexist epithets have traditionally been part of the common parlance, Mayor John Molony might just have gone a little too far.
What inspired Mayor Molony to put his civic foot in it was the female drought in Mount Isa, where he claims the blokes far outnumber the "sheilas". Invited to come up with a solution to redress the balance, he proposed that a few lovelorn "ugly ducklings" could do worse than move to the remote mining town to find a partner.
"May I suggest if there are five blokes to every girl, we should find out where there are beauty-disadvantaged women and ask them to proceed to Mount Isa," he told a local newspaper.
To add insult to injury, Mr Molony implied that the look on some of the women who already lived there proved him right. "Quite often you will see walking down the street a lass who is not so attractive with a wide smile on her face," he explained to the Townsville Bulletin.
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Adventurer
Joined: 28 Jan 2006
|
| Posted: Mon Aug 18, 2008 10:48 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| nateium wrote: |
| itaewonguy wrote: |
NO FAT WOMEN
WHY CANT WE ALL JUST GET ALONG!!!
|
I'm not sure that at the moment a "NO FAT WOMEN" sign would actually be illegal. At least not a "NO FAT PEOPLE" sign. Many posters in this thread seem to be confused about illegal/legal vs right and wrong.
What laws exist at the moment to protect the rights of the obese? in what circumstances?
Besides, obese is a lifestyle choice. ASian, Black, female is not. |
This is gender based discrimination not only based simply on appearance since it only focuses on the appearance of women. What men were barred? So, in a sense, this policy was sexist and involved objectifying women in a blatant manner. Granted, we objectify women in the media, and we take it for granted, but these guys did it very blatantly, and got flack for it. Anyway, if a man doesn't want to dance with a chubby woman or if he wants to take her home, that is his business. Many women in England are not skinny. Everyone knows that, but many of them are still rather attractive. I think some women who are clearly on the chubby side are attractive or might be great women to talk to, so why should I, as a male, be told to only dance with thing men. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mises
Joined: 05 Nov 2007
Location: retired
|
| Posted: Tue Aug 19, 2008 4:41 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Adventurer wrote: |
This is gender based discrimination not only based simply on appearance since it only focuses on the appearance of women. What men were barred? So, in a sense, this policy was sexist and involved objectifying women in a blatant manner. |
I don't think you know how the system works.
Really well dressed and put together dudes don't have to pay to get in, or stand in line. Normal guys on down to fat slobs have to buy at least one bottle per two people (typically). If you are dressed like a slob, no number of bottles will get you in. Women who are great looking can get in for free, of course, and the ugos can buy a bottle if they want to get in too. The fatty women don't get treated like the hot women. Boo hoo. The women are treated the same as men except that more of them get in for free. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
