this post was submitted on 18 Dec 2023
1463 points (97.8% liked)

Mildly Infuriating

35562 readers
1634 users here now

Home to all things "Mildly Infuriating" Not infuriating, not enraging. Mildly Infuriating. All posts should reflect that.

I want my day mildly ruined, not completely ruined. Please remember to refrain from reposting old content. If you post a post from reddit it is good practice to include a link and credit the OP. I'm not about stealing content!

It's just good to get something in this website for casual viewing whilst refreshing original content is added overtime.


Rules:

1. Be Respectful


Refrain from using harmful language pertaining to a protected characteristic: e.g. race, gender, sexuality, disability or religion.

Refrain from being argumentative when responding or commenting to posts/replies. Personal attacks are not welcome here.

...


2. No Illegal Content


Content that violates the law. Any post/comment found to be in breach of common law will be removed and given to the authorities if required.

That means: -No promoting violence/threats against any individuals

-No CSA content or Revenge Porn

-No sharing private/personal information (Doxxing)

...


3. No Spam


Posting the same post, no matter the intent is against the rules.

-If you have posted content, please refrain from re-posting said content within this community.

-Do not spam posts with intent to harass, annoy, bully, advertise, scam or harm this community.

-No posting Scams/Advertisements/Phishing Links/IP Grabbers

-No Bots, Bots will be banned from the community.

...


4. No Porn/ExplicitContent


-Do not post explicit content. Lemmy.World is not the instance for NSFW content.

-Do not post Gore or Shock Content.

...


5. No Enciting Harassment,Brigading, Doxxing or Witch Hunts


-Do not Brigade other Communities

-No calls to action against other communities/users within Lemmy or outside of Lemmy.

-No Witch Hunts against users/communities.

-No content that harasses members within or outside of the community.

...


6. NSFW should be behind NSFW tags.


-Content that is NSFW should be behind NSFW tags.

-Content that might be distressing should be kept behind NSFW tags.

...


7. Content should match the theme of this community.


-Content should be Mildly infuriating.

-At this time we permit content that is infuriating until an infuriating community is made available.

...


8. Reposting of Reddit content is permitted, try to credit the OC.


-Please consider crediting the OC when reposting content. A name of the user or a link to the original post is sufficient.

...

...


Also check out:

Partnered Communities:

1.Lemmy Review

2.Lemmy Be Wholesome

3.Lemmy Shitpost

4.No Stupid Questions

5.You Should Know

6.Credible Defense


Reach out to LillianVS for inclusion on the sidebar.

All communities included on the sidebar are to be made in compliance with the instance rules.

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] ocassionallyaduck@lemmy.world 301 points 11 months ago (4 children)

That is probably a slam dunk (minor) discrimination lawsuit. Your circumstances of birth, including the date, are not something you can be judged for.

Follow up with your ID or Birth certificate and ask "Excuse me?"

[–] blaine@kbin.social 167 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago) (16 children)

@ocassionallyaduck

@The_Picard_Maneuver

Not true in the US. They could ban anyone born in the entire month of April, or anyone who "looks like a pot smoker" if they wanted to.

Applicants, employees and former employees are ONLY protected from employment discrimination based on race, color, religion, sex (including pregnancy, sexual orientation, or gender identity), national origin, age (40 or older), disability and genetic information (including family medical history).

[–] flyingjake@lemmy.one 42 points 11 months ago (4 children)

I wonder if an argument could be made that birthdate is a component of your genetic information including family medical history? It is also potentially age discrimination?

[–] Tbird83ii@lemmy.dbzer0.com 34 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago) (2 children)

Technically this is discrimination based on age.

They were born 4/20/(year). You could make an argument they are discriminating all people exactly (X) years, 4 months, and 2 days old.

[–] CleoTheWizard@lemmy.world 5 points 11 months ago

Yeah we typically thing age discrimination is saying we only hire people between 20-40y/o but it would also cover it if you said “I won’t hire someone 21 years old only” and still applies to banning someone 21.5 years old. And 21 years and 6 months and 27 days old.

Same applies if I ban anyone with an age divisible by 3. It’s a group of people, but if their age has anything to do with why you aren’t hiring them then I’d say this applies.

[–] TseseJuer@lemmy.world -1 points 11 months ago (1 children)
[–] davidgro@lemmy.world 0 points 11 months ago (1 children)

No, the comment was written on the 18th so 2 days. The 4 months only matches because this is December.

[–] TseseJuer@lemmy.world 1 points 11 months ago (1 children)

wtf does the comment date have to do with April being the (4th) month and the (20th) being the 20th day of the month?

[–] davidgro@lemmy.world 0 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago)

Because how old someone is is relative to the current time. And that's the wording that the commenter used: People who are x years, y months, and z days old. The next day those same people will be a day older.

Say the discrimination was about people born on Dec 20 instead of April, in that case they (where I am) are currently X years, 11 months, and 30 days old, and tomorrow is their birthday.

I just realized that they did calculate it the wrong direction though, the 4/20 peeps are 3 months and 30 or 29 days old today (not sure on that) today.

[–] droans@lemmy.world 6 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago) (1 children)

Age discrimination only applies if you're above 40.

[–] JackFrostNCola@lemmy.world 2 points 11 months ago (1 children)

Are you being sarcastic? Or does being rejected for a job for being 'too young' fall under a different discrimination law?
(Genuine question, i have no idea)

[–] ramble81@lemm.ee 6 points 11 months ago

It doesn’t qualify as a type of discrimination that is federally protected. Suprising isn’t it?

[–] Bgugi@lemmy.world 6 points 11 months ago

Creative thoughts, but the exact definitions don't track (from GINA):

Genetic information.--

(A) In general.--The term "genetic information" means, with respect to any individual, information about--

(i) such individual's genetic tests,

(ii) the genetic tests of family members of such individual, and

(iii) the manifestation of a disease or disorder in family members of such individual.

(B) Inclusion of genetic services and participation in genetic research.--Such term includes, with respect to any individual, any request for, or receipt of, genetic services, or participation in clinical research which includes genetic services, by such individual or any family member of such individual.

(C) Exclusions.--The term "genetic information" shall not include information about the sex or age of any individual.

[–] AFKBRBChocolate@lemmy.world 2 points 11 months ago

I doubt it - your age isn't determined by your genetics. The family medical history part is so that someone doesn't fire you (or not hire you) for things like your mom having a kind of cancer that is hereditary. As a manager, if one of my employees tells me their mom has cancer, I'm not allowed to ask what kind.

[–] Chev@lemmy.world 3 points 11 months ago

Nobody said that they are from the US.

load more comments (14 replies)
[–] ryathal@sh.itjust.works 61 points 11 months ago (3 children)

It wouldn't get anywhere in the US. Age is the closest protected class, but only applies to over 40 in the US. Discrimination based on month and day of birth isn't actually illegal.

[–] Pickle_Jr@lemmy.dbzer0.com 41 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago) (3 children)

I honestly think there's a gray area here and it's worth talking to a lawyer if anything. There are certainly some protections for peoples under 40. Being denied a promotion because you're "too young" is certainly a protection. The catch is you have to prove it.

This case is easy to prove though if there are any laws over this.

Edit: but now that I think about it, this is only really a protection if you're already hired at the place. If you just slam the door on people before they can get in, discrimination seems to be legal.

[–] AFKBRBChocolate@lemmy.world 7 points 11 months ago

I believe it's legal in the US to pass someone over for promotion because they're too young. The only protected class related to age is being over 40 (potentially different in some states).

[–] Trainguyrom@reddthat.com 2 points 11 months ago

but now that I think about it, this is only really a protection if you’re already hired at the place. If you just slam the door on people before they can get in, discrimination seems to be legal.

Pretty sure that protection so applies to the application process. Can't have places rejecting every non-white candidate for being the wrong race. The problem is proving that you were rejected for a BS reason is really hard because they usually don't flat out say it, and especially not in writing

[–] Infynis@midwest.social 1 points 11 months ago

Being denied a promotion because you're "too young" is certainly a protection.

It's not actually. Age protections really do only apply to old people. If the person in the post is over 40 though, and got rejected for their birthday, they could probably at least get the company to overturn the rejection. Not sure how well they'd do in court. Most of this stuff doesn't get enforced well, and that one is already a stretch

[–] wreckedcarzz@lemmy.world 27 points 11 months ago

Whelp, time for arson then. Sorry, it's the rules.

[–] pomodoro_longbreak@sh.itjust.works 2 points 11 months ago (1 children)

What about star sign? That's got to be illegal, and it's p close to this

[–] GentlemanLoser@ttrpg.network 6 points 11 months ago (1 children)

They listed the protected classes. Which one is astrology?

[–] pomodoro_longbreak@sh.itjust.works 1 points 11 months ago (3 children)

Yeah yeah not protected, but same could be said for requiring blond hair or blue eyes. Still discrimination

I am not a lawyer

[–] NateSwift@lemmy.world 6 points 11 months ago (1 children)

They did specifically list genetics

[–] pomodoro_longbreak@sh.itjust.works 3 points 11 months ago (1 children)

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 6 points 11 months ago (2 children)
[–] MrZee@lemm.ee 6 points 11 months ago (1 children)

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.

[–] AFKBRBChocolate@lemmy.world 3 points 11 months ago

Exactly. And though there are protected classes at the federal level, there are also some at the state level and they vary. I'm in California, and we have more than most. If you're a business owner or manager, you have to know what they are where you are or it can be really bad.

[–] pomodoro_longbreak@sh.itjust.works 2 points 11 months ago

Yeah more of a case for public shaming or filing a complaint or even just an honest Glass Door review

[–] LastYearsPumpkin@feddit.ch 3 points 11 months ago (2 children)

Because requiring blond hair and blue eyes would, by definition, exclude people based on race.

[–] AFKBRBChocolate@lemmy.world 1 points 11 months ago

Not necessarily true, but 100% discrimination based on genetics, which is a protected class.

[–] pomodoro_longbreak@sh.itjust.works 0 points 11 months ago

Yeah bad example. I'm on break at work

[–] Nouveau_Burnswick@lemmy.world 35 points 11 months ago

Just set your profile to @ not US system and your birthday will be 20/4 instead!

[–] AlfredEinstein@lemmy.world 19 points 11 months ago

Classic age discrimination.

Make sure to find a lawyer who is 69 years old and whose license plate is LOL80085.