People who grumble about the small things in life are often frowned upon by those who just can't seem to catch a break.
How can we blame them?
Most often, a person who is blinded by their privilege takes many things in life for granted while someone who is disadvantaged–due to their race, gender, or status–always seems to get the short end of the stick.
In an effort to expose prejudices that are casually hidden, Redditor corkystclaire asked:
"What's something obviously discriminatory yet broadly accepted by society?"
Much of society views the world with a binary perspective–or they are just very closed-minded.
"Not having baby change facilities in the men's toilets."
– PloppyTheSpaceship
Men In Service
"mandatory military service only for men in a lot of countries."
– Zewarudio
About Hair
"Not letting people wear their hair the way it naturally grows out of their head (at work)"
– SoyAmerinic
The Coworkers
"My last job was supposedly progressive when it came to workplace apparel. I'm white passing and was constantly complimented and revered on how 'creative' my hairstyles were."
"My non-white passing coworker however was always being told how inappropriate, unprofessional, and distracting their hairstyles were. We even planned out the same hairstyles for a few months to prove a point to our boss and all we got at the end was that mine 'look professionally done and cleaner.'"
"I can guarantee you that my hairstyles did not look professionally done and our hair was the same amount of cleanliness."
– 2baverage
Historically Damaging System
"Caste system in India where people were segregated into groups based on their occupation which later got translated into segregation on the basis of birth. Based on this difference, hierarchy was formed which provides different rewards and punishment for different groups. This system is now almost 3000 years old though it's ill effects of discrimination was made illegal through constitution of free India, it still persists in an evolved form."
"In some areas lower castes are still treated as untouchables. Extreme case of it can be seen in southern parts where some of these people announce their arrival while entering into high caste society so that these higher caste people can easily maintain distance from them."
"Though such extreme cases have now decreased due to urbanization and the anonimity that comes with it but it still persists case in point is caste endogamy where marrying outside the caste is considered such an impure task that sometimes it even leads to murder of those who were involved in the act in order to save the family honour and it is famously called honour killings . Things have changed but the equality and zero discrimination that our constitution provides for is still a far fetched dream."
– vats_upp
People who are physically disadvantaged additionally have to worry about other things.
The Cost Of Being Disabled
"The extreme expense often accrued when a person happens to become/is disabled."
"Everything from having to get the correct mobility aids if necessary, to the labour spent trying to find an accessible/adapted house. Nvm lifelong managements and healthcare (specifically monetarily in the US), and the social barriers that disabled ppl (specifically those with physical or notable impairment) deal with on a daily basis."
"When I became physically disabled, the whole word became a mess of inaccessibility with cultural, infrastructural, physical and medical issues I'd never before even considered becoming sometimes impassable barriers."
– cripple2493
Benefits Of Not Living In The US
"Being disabled is still very expensive but I thank the heavens I wasn't born in America when I think about things like that. The ESA (employment support allowance) savings limit here in Britain is £6,000, my medications, my wheelchair, my basic mobility aids, my treatments, my doctors appointments, are all free, and if I live in my own place my rent will be covered. It was an awful and fairly traumatic process to prove I was eligible for these provisions but I'm so grateful for them and the fact that I live in a place where I can get this much help."
– ViSaph
When My Daughter Grows Up
"My child is legally blind, there is no chance of it worsening, she has no medical problems because of it yet she definitely 'costs' more than our non blind child. Appointments, parking costs, petrol to the Appointments, days off work for the Appointments. Then add in the tech she needs/digital magnifiers, monoculars, yes her educational needs are looked after by the state to some degree but alot of it is covered by the family. All these little things add up"
"As she gets older she will completely rely on public transport which mean she'll probably need to live in a better serviced/higher rent area."
"I really had no idea until she came along!"
– niamhweking
Life After An Accident
"My mom was in a severe accident late last year, permanently quadriplegic. I don't think I have a read a truer statement all freaking week. Everything is a battle for her to get anything she needs."
– ThatDadTazz
When it comes to college entry, it's a rigged system.
No Connections
"Legacy college admissions."
"Nepotism."
– flatlyoness
Anti-Asian
"Especially if you’re Asian trying to get into an elite college. Harvard was actually convicted of discrimination against Asian applicants"
"We know you got a 1590 on your SAT, and you participate in 4 extracurriculars, and you tutor other kids in your class, but we think you’re just too shy so we should admit this senator’s dipsh*t kid instead."
– Tacky-Terangreal
Forever In Debt
"Got the same degree as my buddy did. I went to community college he went to a university. The total cost to get my degree was the same as just his room and board for all 4 years."
"Guy made fun of me the whole time. He will be paying back his loans for the next 40 years. Its crazy the mindset people have."
– jcowurm
Societies that don't acknowledge the lack of equality among groups of people are doomed to perpetuate injustice.
But for those who choose to live in the past, it's an inconvenient problem if there is a courageous voice that inspires others to come forward and amplify their demand for progress.
Only then can there be change for the good of humanity.
So let's live out loud!
Want to "know" more?
Sign up for the Knowable newsletter here.
Never miss another big, odd, funny or heartbreaking moment again.
Retailer Sends Apology Letter After Staff Refused To Let Transgender Shopper Try On Clothes In Menswear Changing Rooms
A transgender shopper has been sent a personal letter of apology from British retailer Marks & Spencer after staff refused to let them try on clothes in the menswear changing rooms.
Myla Corvidae, 30, was born female and now identifies as transgender non-binary using they/them pronouns.
Myla Corvidae /SWNS.COM
They had picked up a few items of clothing from the menswear section of M&S in Aberdeen, Scotland, and wanted to try them on in the store.
But a member of staff told them they could not try the clothes on in the changing rooms by the menswear section.
Myla says they were told the facilities were "only for men" during the incident on December 31, 2019.
A spokesman for M&S admitted "a mistake was made" and the store has apologized - including a personal letter from the manager.
Myla, of Aberdeen, said:
"I'd picked up some shirts and jumpers from the menswear section and went into the changing rooms nearby. There was no attendant so I just went on in."
"I left the changing room to grab a bigger size in one of the jumpers and a female attendant approached me on the shop floor."
"She told me I couldn't use the changing rooms there as they were 'only for men' and said that I had to use the changing rooms downstairs which are for women."
"I was utterly shocked and the only thing I could think of to say was 'I'm not female' to which she looked me up and down, apologized and walked off."
"I felt sick, like I was being accused of some kind of crime just for trying on clothes. Afterwards, I went home and cried - I have never been accosted like that in a store before."
"I had to go back in and speak to someone in store because no one took it seriously the first time and I started crying even trying to talk about it again with them."
Myla Corvidae /SWNS.COM
Myla had been shopping in the Aberdeen City Center branch of Marks & Spencer regularly for the past five years before this happened.
Following the incident, Myla has complained to Marks & Spencer who have formally apologized to them both in person and via letter.
Despite the apology from the company, Myla feels unable to return to the shop due to the distress caused on that day.
Myla said:
"I don't think the apology was enough to be honest, it shouldn't have ever happened to start with and I have lost confidence in Marks & Spencer as a company for standing up for trans folk like myself."
"I still feel scared to shop at Marks & Spencer in case it happens again elsewhere or if I have to deal with that same person again."
"The fact that I saw a female using the space at the same time in full view of the attendant when I left the changing rooms just made it so much more of a personal attack."
"I honestly don't think I would go back there, I don't want to have to experience something like that again or see that staff member again."
"I am still very much upset by what happened and if I were to go back I wouldn't go on my own and I would not be shopping for clothes there again."
Myla Corvidae /SWNS.COM
An M&S spokesperson said:
"With our fitting rooms we only offer individual lockable cubicles and this is to ensure every customer feels comfortable and has the privacy they need."
"The fitting rooms are located within our womenswear and menswear departments and therefore are mainly used by customers of that gender. However, as an inclusive retailer and in line with most other retailers, we allow customers the choice of fitting room in respect of how they identify themselves."
"Clearly on this occasion a mistake was made, we have apologized to our customer for this incident, additionally our store manager wrote a personal apology assuring the customer they have spoken to the team."
Woman Says Sexist Barber Shop Owner Blocked Her From Getting A Haircut Because Men Would Be 'Put Off' Seeing Her Inside
A barber shop owner blocked a woman from having a haircut - claiming men are 'put off' if they see a female inside.
Short-haired Cloë Freeman, 29, said she asked for a traditional fade at the store.
But she was stunned when her request was refused by staff at Misters Mens Hairdressers in St Helier, Jersey, - because she was a woman.
Staff later said she was denied her cut as male customers would be put off by her presence.
Jersey Evening Post / SWNS
The civil servant has said she found the incident "upsetting" and is demanding an apology from the hairdressers.
Cloë said:
"I wasn't even given a chance to say what I was looking for. I was told that they don't service women, end of."
"But I think when you look at my hair for just two seconds, it is pretty obvious I wasn't coming in looking for a bouncy blow dry."
"The only reason I couldn't get what I wanted was because I was a woman."
"I had been shaving my own hair for quite some time and a while ago decided to try out a new style and approached Image Barbers at West's Centre to get a fade."
"Initially I was a bit apprehensive, but when the guys in the barber didn't blink an eye, I then felt comfortable enough to approach a few different barbers in town."
Cloë added that she had gone to salons in the past but found that barbers had better expertise in the style that she wanted.
She added:
"I was particularly taken aback by the reception I got when I walked into Misters because I have had fades done by around four or five barber's shops in town and not one of them made me feel unwelcome, or even acted as though me being there was unusual."
In addition to what Ms Freeman described as an unnecessarily abrupt reception, she added that the shop was completely empty at the time.
She added:
"What I was looking to get done would take around 20 to 30 minutes and, as the place was completely empty, it made the situation even stranger."
Cloë said that although she recognized that the barbershop may not have intended to discriminate against her, the incident had shown 'a general lack of awareness'.
A woman who worked at Misters Mens Hairdressers, but would not give her name, defended her position to refuse Cloë a haircut.
She said:
"Women sometimes come in here looking for a haircut because it is cheaper than in salons."
"But when men come in and see a woman sitting here they are put off coming in as they don't like being here when a woman is here."
But Advocate Barbara Corbett from Corbett Le Quesne law firm has waded into the argument, and said the treatment of Cloë was discriminatory.
She said:
"This is a case of discrimination. And while there may be a defense, I cannot see which one would apply. It's like a nail technician refusing to do a man's nails."
"Men go to barbers to get a particular kind of haircut for the kind of hair they have. "
"If a man with long hair went to a salon to get his hair cut, the salon wouldn't be allowed to refuse him."
"So if this woman was looking for the same haircut as some men get, but was refused on the grounds of being a woman, this is a case of discrimination."
She said that Misters Mens Hairdressers' argument that having a woman getting her hair cut in the premises could make men feel uncomfortable was not a justifiable defense.
Since the Discrimination (Jersey) Law 2013 was introduced in September 2014, people in Jersey have had the right not to be subjected to discrimination on the grounds of race.
Since that time, the law has been extended to cover areas including gender, sexual orientation and age.
*A version of this story originally appeared on SWNS and was written by Krystle Higgins and John Bett
Kentucky Private School Expels Student For 'Lifestyle Violation' After She's Pictured With A Rainbow Shirt And Cake
A private Christian School in Louisville, Kentucky expelled a student for what they called a "lifestyle violation."
What was this supposed violation?
A photo on her mother's personal Facebook page of her birthday party, where she is wearing a sweater with a rainbow on it and has a rainbow-colored cake.
Here is the post the school officials found so offensive.
Just a few days after her mother posted the photo, 15-year-old Kayla Kenney received the news that she had been expelled from Whitefield Academy via an email to her mother, Kimberly Alford.
Alford was shocked when she opened the email.
WAVE 3 News
She told WAVE3 News:
"It was an email expelling Kayla from Whitefield immediately due to a post on social media. I feel judged, she feels judged, just very devastating for us."
The email, from Whitefield Academy's Head of School Dr. Bruce Jacobson, claimed that the photo was just the latest of two year's worth of these so-called "lifestyle violations."
Alford was shocked this simple photo of a girl's birthday with an assorted color cake—the exact description on the store receipt—was the "last straw" for the school.
Alford did not disclose the other supposed violations, but if this photo is any example... Whitefiled is a private religious school and can enact whatever rules they want, but are they so homophobic they've banned anything related to rainbows?
Lisa Frank must be Whitefiled enemy #1.
Whitefield Head of School Jacobson said the photo:
"...demonstrates a posture of morality and cultural acceptance contrary to that of Whitefield Academy's beliefs."
But is it the potential for LGBTQ acceptance or the science behind rainbows—the refraction and reflection of light through round water droplets acting as prisms—that Whitefield finds so abhorrent?
While the school's code of conduct does mention sexual orientation and does allow for discipline for a student's behavior off campus, Alford is confused as to why this particular photo led administrators to assume that rule was even relevant in this situation.
"She loves to laugh and dance and that's just her. There was nothing intended by that and even when I went back and got the receipt from the bakery, it didn't say anything about representation, it just said assorted colors."
When Alford appealed her daughter's expulsion, the school agreed to change it to a voluntary withdrawal so that Kenney's record would not show her having been expelled.
She is concerned that the school's negativity and discrimination might have a permanent effect on Kayla, however.
"You know we teach our kids what would Jesus do. What would he do here?"
People on social media were highly critical of the school's decision.
@B52Malmet The most striking thing here is that the Christian school took offence at rainbows which according to th… https://t.co/TSIgs7nK9P— Brian Gilmer (@Brian Gilmer) 1579094097
Rainbow shirt “lifestyle violation,” student expelled from private school. My daughter is a student at a local pr… https://t.co/8K7PJMaHc4— J.T. Yuodis,PIO (@J.T. Yuodis,PIO) 1578979741
@wvlt She got in trouble for a rainbow cake and shirt? That's it? How is that against any rule?— Josh Davis (@Josh Davis) 1579026078
Many chose to highlight the ridiculousness of the situation.
@NBCNews What do they do when it rains and there is a rainbow after? Are they banning rainbows?— Elizabeth Alonso (@Elizabeth Alonso) 1579073064
@USATODAY @newsmanbluesman Guess we should expel all the kids who draw rainbows on their pictures as well. What a j… https://t.co/gphbzj2z9T— Sara O'Neill (@Sara O'Neill) 1579073855
Others left Alford colorful words of support on Facebook.
Kimberly Alford/Facebook
Kimberly Alford/Facebook
Kimberly Alford/Facebook
She ultimately chose to enroll Kayla in public school, where she is reportedly doing well despite having been uprooted after 4 years of making friends at Whitefield.
Alford told Wave 3 News that Kayla doesn't want to go back to Whitefield, even if she could.
North Carolina Girls Win Big As Judge Strikes Down School's Sexist Uniform Requirement As Unconstitutional
A strict uniform policy that required a North Carolina middle school's girls to wear skirts to school every day was struck down by a federal judge.
They ruled that the antiquated policy was a constitutional violation of the equal protection clause.
In 2016, the American Civil Liberties Union, the ACLU of North Carolina, filed a lawsuit against Charter Day School in Leland on behalf of girls ages 5, 10 and 14.
Their suit claimed that the skirt requirement was an academic distraction, made students feel cold and inhibited them from performing physical activities.
The oldest student, Keely Burks, asked for help from the ACLU after her right to file a petition against the skirt requirement was taken away.
"I created a petition to ask my school to change its policy that says girls have to wear skirts to school or risk being punished."
We're proud to represent Keely in a lawsuit filed last year. #InternationalWomensDay https://t.co/yEi73m0UUZ— ACLU of North Carolina (@ACLU of North Carolina) 1489022520.0
On Friday, Judge Malcolm Howard in the Eastern District of North Carolina ruled the "skirts requirement causes the girls to suffer a burden the boys do not, simply because they are female."
The judge also rejected the charter school's reasoning for the dress code.
They alleged it promoted "traditional values" and cultivated "mutual respect" between boys and girls at the school.
It took a court order to force a North Carolina charter school to accept the simple fact that, in 2019, girls shoul… https://t.co/ufTt6o2XOy— Global Fund forWomen (@Global Fund forWomen) 1554062411.0
The school argued the lawsuit in 2016 with a written statement:
"CDS's dress code is not discriminatory and is clearly written out such that parents and students know what is permitted."
The school also argued they did not have to comply with Title IX, a federal law that protects students in educational programs that receive federal funds from gender discrimination.
A parent of one of the students involved in the case, Bonnie Peltier, was satisfied with the judge's ruling but balked over the length of time it took.
Peltier told NBC News:
"We're happy the court agrees, but it's disappointing that it took a court order to force the school to accept the simple fact that, in 2019, girls should have the choice to wear pants."
When another parent, Erika Booth, was alerted to the lawsuit, she was relieved in knowing she wasn't alone.
"Once I found out there was a lawsuit, I was delighted," she told TODAY Style, last year.
"I felt like the rule was unfair to girls all along. When my daughter … found out she had to wear skirts the first day of kindergarten, she cried."
It took long enough for us to get here, didn't it?
A charter school in North Carolina loose a law suit for a dress code were girls were never permitted to wear pants.… https://t.co/w8vGZUAtDp— Nadine Liberty (@Nadine Liberty) 1553981068.0
@APSouthRegion @AP Is it still 1952 in North Carolina? And what does this word ‘forcing’ mean??— JMS (@JMS) 1553880980.0
@APSouthRegion @AP YES ! About god damn time this happened this is just plain sexist forcing girls to have to wear… https://t.co/HoD6JSASt0— Howling wolf (@Howling wolf) 1553881389.0
@APSouthRegion "Traditional" values are one thing, being Victorian is another. Girls can still represent the schoo… https://t.co/L2b4Tz4VQT— Natural Flirt Gamer (@Natural Flirt Gamer) 1553892999.0
@ACLU Fifty years ago, when I graduated from high school, this was the rule. Fifty. Years. Ago. https://t.co/uGSANAicsM— Mary Ann (@Mary Ann) 1553871308.0
@ACLU Unreal. I fought for that on OSU campus 50 years ago!— Robertson Work (@Robertson Work) 1553870703.0
The ACLU celebrated the momentous victory.
Today’s ruling vindicates our young clients. This policy reflected antiquated stereotypes, intentionally sending th… https://t.co/SJDQjhPyL1— ACLU (@ACLU) 1553870551.0
Welcome to 2019, Charter Day School.
Make room for the girls, cause we've been waiting a very long time.