Thinking
How and What I Think About Discrimination and Why it Matters
We need an honest discussion
In response to Dr. Mehmet’s recent article.
Ah, that dirty 14-letter word starting with D. Everybody hates it. The funny thing is everyone has had that experience. That suggests that our forebears who have gone through such treatment did not manage to prevent it from re-occurring.
I am sure they have attempted to. I argue that our forebears did not fail. This could be a thorny issue that cannot be resolved within 1 generation. It could be.
That begets the question. What is discrimination? How do we deal with it as a society?
Definition of Discrimination
I took the top search result from Google to look for answers. It points me to the Equality Act 2010, enacted in the United Kingdom.
This is the blanket statement right on top: -
“Discrimination means treating you unfairly because of who you are.”
The Equality Act of 2010 explains who you are in the context of discriminatory practices.
“There are nine protected characteristics in the Equality Act. Discrimination which happens because of one or more of these characteristics is unlawful under the Act. We all have some of these characteristics — for example, sex or age — so the Act protects everyone from discrimination.”
These are the nine protected characteristics of the Equality Act 2010.
“The characteristics that are protected by the Equality Act 2010 are:
age
disability
gender reassignment
marriage or civil partnership (in employment only)
pregnancy and maternity
race
religion or belief
sex
sexual orientation
….“
Basically, you have a case when you are discriminated against because of the properties that make up who you are, plus your beliefs.
Discrimination manifests itself in 2 forms as defined by the Act. Direct discrimination and indirect discrimination may arise as a result of an infringement of the nine protected characteristics.
Please refer to the citations at the bottom if you have a keen interest in the topic.
I have to go beyond definitions and assumptions because I am searching for cases that cannot be regarded as discriminatory practices even though they appear so.
It took me a while to search for the other spectrum of the argument, and I am glad that I found it.
This is why I love lawmakers more than any policymakers. Lawmakers are trained to think.
Justifying Discrimination
This sub-header might sound uncomfortable, but hang on for a moment. There is a lot of sense in this section.
This is the introduction of Justifying Discrimination in the Act.
”Sometimes it doesn’t count as unlawful discrimination if someone treats you unfairly because of who you are. The Equality Act 2010 says if someone has a good enough reason for treating you unfairly, they may be able to justify discriminating against you.”
It suggests that unequal treatment does not equate to unlawful treatment. The onus is on the person practicing discriminatory ways to prove their case.
“But sometimes people are allowed to discriminate against you if they have a good enough reason for doing so. They would need to be able to prove this in court, if necessary….”
It boils down to a good enough reason. This is the list: -
“The Equality Act says discrimination can be justified if the person who’s discriminating against you can show it’s a proportionate means of achieving a legitimate aim…. A legitimate aim is a reason behind the discrimination…. This reason must not be discriminatory in itself and it must be a genuine or real reason…. Here are examples of legitimate aims:
the health, safety, and welfare of individuals
running an efficient service
requirements of a business
desire to make a profit.
….”
Okay, now I understand the 2 ends of the argument put forth by the Lawmakers in the United Kingdom.
It is time to apply what I read to what I know.
Let me start off with age.
The World of Sports — Ironman Triathlon
Right off the bat — we cannot sue Ironman Triathlon for age discrimination even though they filter us into 5-year age groups.
Ironman Triathlon acknowledges the top competitors coming from individual 5-year age groups, with the assumption of fitness equity.
The 47 years old is fit for his age, so is the 26 years old. Cross-comparisons do not make sense because their heart, lungs, physiology is in a different space.
This falls under the concept of Justified Discrimination.
The World of Active Examination — Leave Anytime You Want
I coined this. I do see a difference between passive and active examination, each having merits in its own right.
A passive examination means we cannot leave the examination room until the time is up.
The active form of examination, on the other hand, means it could end way earlier than we think.
There are 2 types of active examination that I have personally experienced: -
- I am free to drop out, and I walk away.
- I got bumped out because I did not make the cut.
Let me explain what I have gone through and why I think they are Justified Discrimination.
Dropping Out
Singaporean males are bounded by National Service until they are 40 years of age. We are required to remain physically fit until then. This is manifested in the annual Individual Physical Proficiency Test.
All we have to do is to pass that god-damned test. There are 3 stations, each of which conferred points that add to the total assessment: -
- Sit-up station (Maximum of 25 points).
- Push-ups station (Maximum of 25 points).
- 2.4 kilometers run station (Maximum of 50 points).
We need to accumulate points from all stations to pass the test. The passing mark is 51 out of 100 points.
These are the only 2 permutations to the test: -
- Sequence 1 — Sit-up, push-up, run.
- Sequence 2 — Push-up, sit-up, run.
The run is placed at the final leg because the authorities reasoned most people would have perished after the intense run. No one would be able to continue with their push-ups and sit-ups.
Now, we get to the actual day administration.
You might be surprised to know that we are not mandated to finish all 3 stations if we know that we cannot pass them. In fact, the officer-in-charge will make this point clear to us at the start of each assessment.
“ … Feel free to drop out if you know you are a. not going to complete your run before you do not run at all, b. you cannot pass your test even if you score 50 points for running, c. your total possible points from running combined with push-ups and sit-ups are less than 51. We will not stop you, and we will not waste your time. Inform us that you are dropping out, and we will register your attendance. There is no need to kill yourself for a fitness test. Go home, train hard, and come back again when you are ready.”
This is not discriminating against those who cannot pass the test.
This policy tells me that I can walk away when I am not in the running.
I have a choice, and that is good.
Bumped Out
I have gone through excruciating examinations where it is a race against the clock.
This is the format: -
- 4-hour examination.
- 4-tier examination based on qualification rounds.
- Every 1-tier lasts an hour.
- Submit examination scripts when we are done.
- If we pass, we proceed to the next tier.
- If we fail, we are bumped out and can head home.
This is a form of active grade allocation and distribution. Chances are, you are going to get an A or A+ if you made it to the final round. You are likely to get an A- or B+ if you made it to the 3rd round. And so on, so forth.
Many of my peers were uncomfortable with this format because it made them feel bad for not making it into the 2nd round.
But they did not feel discriminated against.
On Surveys and Dr. Mehmet’s Story
I do think that surveys are designed to discriminate. They do bear similarities to the active examination format.
Surveys are implemented with the intent of answering questions the surveyor has in mind. And they do have a target audience.
I am not a recipient of the recent Medium survey that Dr. Mehmet wrote about in his story. I do not feel discriminated against. It just means that I am not their target audience.
Dr. Mehmet mentioned that he got bumped out of the survey after populating his nationality and age group. I would say there are many more Australians active on Medium than Zambians, Romanians, or Singaporeans, for that matter. Therefore, the quota for Australian representation might have been reached before Dr. Mehmet started the survey.
There could be a lot more age mature writers than struggling ones like I am, on this platform.
This is what I think.
My Sentiments
The survey is not intended to be discriminatory by nature (I believe). That said, it is disheartening Dr. Mehmet did not get a chance to articulate his views. I say this from a personal perspective.
Many people believe that they are sitting on the apex of the writing food chain, rightfully so, and eat novice writers for breakfast, lunch, and dinner.
Dr. Mehmet gives novices a chance to grow and mature through his publications amidst non-stop criticisms. He has valuable points to contribute on behalf of his writers.
Why not listen to what he has to say?
My Take
It is easy to fall into this trap of assuming discriminatory practices. I do, from time to time, fall prey to such thinking.
We have to evolve.
The real issue is when we have things to contribute, and we are not given the microphone.
Take heart, Dr Mehmet Yildiz.
Your writers know what you have done for them.
Press on.
Aldric
Sources of Citation:
World Health Organisation — On Non-Discrimination.
Equality Act 2010, United Kingdom.
Individual Physical Proficiency Test, Singapore.
About the Author:
As a content contributor, I write my observations from daily life and my business exposure.
Because our life experience is the bedrock of our unique perspectives.
