Quote:
Originally Posted by Jaine Perotti
Again, if something doesn't contribute to the oppression of a group, how can you call it "____ism"?
|
X-ism does not mean oppressing based on X. It merely means making a distinction based on X. It isn't automatically a negative thing.
Quote:
|
There are functional reasons for excluding certain people from groups that have nothing to do with actively discriminating against them. People with entry-level resumes are excluded from jobs which require extensive leadership experience. People who can't swim are excluded from lifeguarding. Non-athletic people are excluded from professional sports teams. People with low SAT scores are excluded from the Ivy League. Yet in these instances, no-one would say that actual discrimination is taking place against people with no job experience, no swimming ability, no athletic talent, or poor test-taking skills.
|
What you've described here is
exactly discrimination. You seem to be treating the word as if it is describing something unfair, and that's not what it means. It just means taking that attribute into account when deciding how to treat someone. Discrimination based on things other than ability or performance is often (not always) unfair, but discrimination based on how well one can do the job is perfectly appropriate.
I'm afraid that the mismatch between your personal definitions and the customary and "correct" definition is going to mess up most discussions you want to have on the topic, and that's a shame. People probably would agree with you wholeheartedly if you could find common vocabulary.