Because requiring blond hair and blue eyes would, by definition, exclude people based on race.
Comment on This person's rejection reason
pomodoro_longbreak@sh.itjust.works 1 year agoYeah yeah not protected, but same could be said for requiring blond hair or blue eyes. Still discrimination
I am not a lawyer
LastYearsPumpkin@feddit.ch 1 year ago
AFKBRBChocolate@lemmy.world 1 year ago
Not necessarily true, but 100% discrimination based on genetics, which is a protected class.
pomodoro_longbreak@sh.itjust.works 1 year ago
Yeah bad example. I’m on break at work
KISSmyOS@lemmy.world 1 year ago
And that’s probably for the better.
pomodoro_longbreak@sh.itjust.works 1 year ago
Tell me how you really feel why don’t you
NateSwift@lemmy.world 1 year ago
They did specifically list genetics
pomodoro_longbreak@sh.itjust.works 1 year ago
How is that different from any other accident of birth that can’t be changed? People really do discriminate based on when you were born:
Not hard to extrapolate a case from this. Imagine a landlord refusing to rent because you’re a “scorpio” or an employer turning you down because they’re looking for a “dog” person.
AFKBRBChocolate@lemmy.world 1 year ago
Bad things, but not illegal
MrZee@lemm.ee 1 year ago
Agreed. A lot of people in this thread are confusing what they believe should be illegal discrimination with what is actually illegal discrimination. Or they believe discrimination laws are more broadly encompassing than they are. There are a lot of kinds of discrimination that most of us agree is bad and shouldn’t be allowed… but unfortunately is not illegal.
pomodoro_longbreak@sh.itjust.works 1 year ago
Yeah more of a case for public shaming or filing a complaint or even just an honest Glass Door review