I think that, rightly or wrongly, humans have a pack animal instinct and will generally associate with people with whom they identify, to give them a sense of security. That's why I wasn't too upset about the Asian petrol station thing, because I got the feeling that once supplies started running out, there might have been a bit of "looking after their own" from both the white and Asian communities in that area. If I saw a rental advert for "Nigerian male" I wouldn't bat an eyelid because I kind of get why people wish to "stick together" That's why there are ex-pat communities abroad. It's just human nature.
But you can see why such discrimination is illegal? Surely you don't think provision of housing, jobs, opportunities should be restricted to people through such irrelevant discrimination?
The fact is if we had no legislation, certain groups would be severely disadvantaged and restricted though prejudice - that wouldn't be good for society, and of course wouldn't be right - wouldn't you agree? If you found yourself in a position where you were unfairly discriminated against in such an important way as housing or employment, wouldn't you want to be protected?
But you can see why such discrimination is illegal? Surely you don't think provision of housing, jobs, opportunities should be restricted to people through such irrelevant discrimination?
The fact is if we had no legislation, certain groups would be severely disadvantaged and restricted though prejudice - that wouldn't be good for society, and of course wouldn't be right - wouldn't you agree? If you found yourself in a position where you were unfairly discriminated against in such an important way as housing or employment, wouldn't you want to be protected?
Regardless of the law, such things will remain widespread, just quieter, and more subtle, which brings us back to the point of the thread. The law cannot overcome human nature, and how people relate to one another. It may not be palatable, but it's the way the world works, wherever you go.
IMO there's no excusing it. It's illegal and I would like to see some kind of process which puts an onus on agents to report landlords who ask for that discrimination to take place.
With the best will in the world putting a law/regulation in place doesn't make it workable...
Ultimately the Landlord would still find an agent who operated outside the law or would simply let directly which would then offer even less protection to anyone who did rent their property.
If someone is that determined not to let to a certain group there is very little that can realistically be done about it. The law abiding will always stick to the rules and those that aren't simply won't.
It's perfectly natural for people to go with what they know and trust. Black people often use other black people if they are having work done on their house etc. Same for Pakistanis using a Pakistani-owned garage to get their car fixed. They are obviously decisons made consciously and openly - and it's absolutely the private business of those concerned if they want to do that. Who am I to tell people who they should and should not do business with? The same applies to renting your own private property.
I should add that I personally don't give two hoots who might rent my property as long as they don't damage it in any way. But that's me. If others feel more comfortable doing things differently then it's their choice. Better that they be able to do it openly.
With the builders example for instance - why shouldn't a West Indian person who wants their house renovated be able to place an ad specifically requesting a West Indian builder?
You do understand though, that it is illegal to discriminate on such a basis when it comes to housing (and has been for over 40 years), but isn't illegal to choose where you shop?
Housing, employment, education etc are legislated over because they are so vitally important and it would clearly be both wrong and damaging for people to discriminate and limit someone's opportunities on such a basis. A society that would allow any group to be disadvantaged in such important things, for so crude a reason, wouldn't be a good one.
To be honest, I can't fathom how I could possibly 'know and trust' someone because they are the same colour as me Frankly that's just plain ill-founded prejudice and the kind of reason legislation was introduced.
Regardless of the law, such things will remain widespread, just quieter, and more subtle, which brings us back to the point of the thread. The law cannot overcome human nature, and how people relate to one another. It may not be palatable, but it's the way the world works, wherever you go.
I don't agree. I think the introduction of legislation has brought about real change and many people don't harbour these insidious and well concealed prejudices. But there's evidently more to be done as some such are still knocking about and it's hard to identify in order to address it.
Laws can and do prompt people to progress - most people accept marital rape as wrong these days, not so long ago that wasn't the case. We've made a lot of progress with anti-discrimination but clearly we do need to nudge things further and hope for change.
As I suggested, if there were some kind of penalty for landlords seeking to break legislation, and an onus on agents to report it, this particular problem could be solved to a degree IMO.
Just as illegal of course. Though it raises a different angle - for a home share, should it be illegal? No way should people be discriminated on skin colour for a whole property let - but if you are seeking a lodger, perhaps it is acceptable to seek something that is important to you - e.g. English speakers only, similar religion, vegetarian. Hmm - pondering that....
If I was taking in a lodger, skin colour wouldn't matter but I will be honest and say I wouldn't even consider someone who didn't speak english. I probably wouldn't consider a man either if I lived alone.
I know that seems wrong and it IS discrimination. But I do believe people should get a choice in who they actually share their home with.
You do understand though, that it is illegal to discriminate on such a basis when it comes to housing (and has been for over 40 years), but isn't illegal to choose where you shop?
Housing, employment, education etc are legislated over because they are so vitally important and it would clearly be both wrong and damaging for people to discriminate and limit someone's opportunities on such a basis. A society that would allow any group to be disadvantaged in such important things, for so crude a reason, wouldn't be a good one.
To be honest, I can't fathom how I could possibly 'know and trust' someone because they are the same colour as me Frankly that's just plain ill-founded prejudice and the kind of reason legislation was introduced.
It happens - and it happens a lot. Whether it be because the person feels more comfortable or because they are positively discriminating becasue they'd rather that person of that colour or that crede or that nationality benefitted rather than someone else - it happens. And if it happens with these things it will happen with housing - and there's nothing you or I or anyone else can do about it. You can fine people or do whatever and it won't change the way they feel. In short it's a waste of time.
With the best will in the world putting a law/regulation in place doesn't make it workable...
Ultimately the Landlord would still find an agent who operated outside the law or would simply let directly which would then offer even less protection to anyone who did rent their property.
If someone is that determined not to let to a certain group there is very little that can realistically be done about it. The law abiding will always stick to the rules and those that aren't simply won't.
I don't agree. I think a penalty for committing such an act for both landlord and agent would go some way to improving things. I'm not sure currently how it stands with the agents in the article - could they be charged with anything? I need to read up on that
I suppose one of the problems is the lack of required regulation and audit in the industry - that would be another method of tackling the less law-abiding agencies.
If I was taking in a lodger, skin colour wouldn't matter but I will be honest and say I wouldn't even consider someone who didn't speak english. I probably wouldn't consider a man either if I lived alone.
I know that seems wrong and it IS discrimination. But I do believe people should get a choice in who they actually share their home with.
Yeah I agree with that. A whole property let should be subject to anti-discrimination legislation, a home share shouldn't.
There's no reasonable argument for discriminating on skin colour, religion etc if you are letting a property - references and financial ability etc are reasonable and adequate.
But sharing one's living space, well, of course it's reasonable to be free to apply your personal choice in whichever way you see fit. EDIT And just to add, I wouldn't see it as wrong or discriminatory.
I don't agree. I think the introduction of legislation has brought about real change and many people don't harbour these insidious and well concealed prejudices. But there's evidently more to be done as some such are still knocking about and it's hard to identify in order to address it.
Laws can and do prompt people to progress - most people accept marital rape as wrong these days, not so long ago that wasn't the case. We've made a lot of progress with anti-discrimination but clearly we do need to nudge things further and hope for change.
As I suggested, if there were some kind of penalty for landlords seeking to break legislation, and an onus on agents to report it, this particular problem could be solved to a degree IMO.
The legislation just stops it happening overtly, through fear of penalty. But all the legislation in the world won't change human nature. If a person wishes only to do business with a certain sex, race, ethnicity, nationality etc, he will find a way to do it.
I believe I am discriminated against as a white male musician as my records never, ever get any accolades at the MOBO awards. I can't prove it is deliberate, but I'll get to the bottom of this if it's the last thing I do.
The legislation just stops it happening overtly, through fear of penalty. But all the legislation in the world won't change human nature. If a person wishes only to do business with a certain sex, race, ethnicity, nationality etc, he will find a way to do it.
I can't agree sorry. The progress within our society over the centuries demonstrates that legislation, penalties and regulation do make substantial improvements, even if some quarters take longer to catch up than others.
It's as much about changing attitudes as it is about penalising people for such behaviour. It takes time, and it's worrying that people are still discriminating in these covert ways, but we have to challenge it and find ways to make it harder and harder for such people to do these things.
Of course there will always be a handful of people who break the law, but I think we can make more progress with the kind of people who just don't see the issue with it - it just takes time and methods to hit home that this kinda crap is not acceptable.
Yeah I agree with that. A whole property let should be subject to anti-discrimination legislation, a home share shouldn't.
There's no reasonable argument for discriminating on skin colour, religion etc if you are letting a property - references and financial ability etc are reasonable and adequate.
But sharing one's living space, well, of course it's reasonable to be free to apply your personal choice in whichever way you see fit. EDIT And just to add, I wouldn't see it as wrong or discriminatory.
Why would you consider the latter example of perhaps refusing to share your home with somebody based on their ethnicity as reasonable out of interest?
I believe I am discriminated against as a white male musician as my records never, ever get any accolades at the MOBO awards. I can't prove it is deliberate, but I'll get to the bottom of this if it's the last thing I do.
You haven't really thought this one through, have you?
Why would you consider the latter example of perhaps refusing to share your home with somebody based on their ethnicity as reasonable out of interest?
I would hope it wasn't on that basis to be honest - I wouldn't like it if it was! But people can't be forced to ditch unfair discrimination - they have to be encouraged, and respected as well. Housing (as in full lets), employment, education etc these are things nobody should be excluded from on such ridiculously unfair discrimination. and there's no reasonable argument to do so - hence why we have legislation for it. But I don't think it right nor beneficial to apply such legislation to one's own living space - it would be unreasonable.
It makes me think of a thread I saw on Big Brother where some people were saying it was racist to not fancy X race.... Some things are *way* too far. :eek: People's living space should be where they can be as prejudiced as they like.
Comments
But you can see why such discrimination is illegal? Surely you don't think provision of housing, jobs, opportunities should be restricted to people through such irrelevant discrimination?
The fact is if we had no legislation, certain groups would be severely disadvantaged and restricted though prejudice - that wouldn't be good for society, and of course wouldn't be right - wouldn't you agree? If you found yourself in a position where you were unfairly discriminated against in such an important way as housing or employment, wouldn't you want to be protected?
Regardless of the law, such things will remain widespread, just quieter, and more subtle, which brings us back to the point of the thread. The law cannot overcome human nature, and how people relate to one another. It may not be palatable, but it's the way the world works, wherever you go.
Ultimately the Landlord would still find an agent who operated outside the law or would simply let directly which would then offer even less protection to anyone who did rent their property.
If someone is that determined not to let to a certain group there is very little that can realistically be done about it. The law abiding will always stick to the rules and those that aren't simply won't.
You do understand though, that it is illegal to discriminate on such a basis when it comes to housing (and has been for over 40 years), but isn't illegal to choose where you shop?
Housing, employment, education etc are legislated over because they are so vitally important and it would clearly be both wrong and damaging for people to discriminate and limit someone's opportunities on such a basis. A society that would allow any group to be disadvantaged in such important things, for so crude a reason, wouldn't be a good one.
To be honest, I can't fathom how I could possibly 'know and trust' someone because they are the same colour as me
I don't agree. I think the introduction of legislation has brought about real change and many people don't harbour these insidious and well concealed prejudices. But there's evidently more to be done as some such are still knocking about and it's hard to identify in order to address it.
Laws can and do prompt people to progress - most people accept marital rape as wrong these days, not so long ago that wasn't the case. We've made a lot of progress with anti-discrimination but clearly we do need to nudge things further and hope for change.
As I suggested, if there were some kind of penalty for landlords seeking to break legislation, and an onus on agents to report it, this particular problem could be solved to a degree IMO.
I know that seems wrong and it IS discrimination. But I do believe people should get a choice in who they actually share their home with.
It happens - and it happens a lot. Whether it be because the person feels more comfortable or because they are positively discriminating becasue they'd rather that person of that colour or that crede or that nationality benefitted rather than someone else - it happens. And if it happens with these things it will happen with housing - and there's nothing you or I or anyone else can do about it. You can fine people or do whatever and it won't change the way they feel. In short it's a waste of time.
I don't agree. I think a penalty for committing such an act for both landlord and agent would go some way to improving things. I'm not sure currently how it stands with the agents in the article - could they be charged with anything?
I suppose one of the problems is the lack of required regulation and audit in the industry - that would be another method of tackling the less law-abiding agencies.
Yeah I agree with that. A whole property let should be subject to anti-discrimination legislation, a home share shouldn't.
There's no reasonable argument for discriminating on skin colour, religion etc if you are letting a property - references and financial ability etc are reasonable and adequate.
But sharing one's living space, well, of course it's reasonable to be free to apply your personal choice in whichever way you see fit. EDIT And just to add, I wouldn't see it as wrong or discriminatory.
The legislation just stops it happening overtly, through fear of penalty. But all the legislation in the world won't change human nature. If a person wishes only to do business with a certain sex, race, ethnicity, nationality etc, he will find a way to do it.
Or the difference between Vernon and them, is they are musicians - and Vernon isn't?
Failed gag, Vernon - sorry
I live in Birmingham and I remember a few on the Stratford road had Asian or blacks only, it was reported in the local paper.
I can't agree
It's as much about changing attitudes as it is about penalising people for such behaviour. It takes time, and it's worrying that people are still discriminating in these covert ways, but we have to challenge it and find ways to make it harder and harder for such people to do these things.
Of course there will always be a handful of people who break the law, but I think we can make more progress with the kind of people who just don't see the issue with it - it just takes time and methods to hit home that this kinda crap is not acceptable.
Why would you consider the latter example of perhaps refusing to share your home with somebody based on their ethnicity as reasonable out of interest?
You haven't really thought this one through, have you?
I would hope it wasn't on that basis to be honest - I wouldn't like it if it was!
It makes me think of a thread I saw on Big Brother where some people were saying it was racist to not fancy X race.... Some things are *way* too far. :eek: People's living space should be where they can be as prejudiced as they like.
I was hoping they'd at least come back and admit their
don't feed the fantasist
Smart money's on "no".
I feel like a rabbit in the headlights.
I'll just take the criticism is only because I am black.
I can't say what the employer was. I don't think it's too hard to guess though.
Management was just as annoyed as the staff about it - the decision to make us watch them came from much higher up.
Aww boo hoo only tawk to people I want you to tawk to!
I've not the foggiest!
I can't actually imagine a company that would do such a thing - why can't you mention them?
And can you clarify, were non-whites actively excluded from watching it? Did you have a union? Did anyone do anything about it?