Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

SadLaser t1_j66nh5a wrote

No, it's not. It's not discrimination to hire someone with the appropriate qualifications for the job. You can reject an applicant for a job as an engineer if they don't have the appropriate qualifications, right? If the role requires you to be a particular race, age, gender, certain tone of voice, etc, those are part of the qualifications. Not all jobs require the same things.

1

SpecialistAd5537 t1_j66pznu wrote

Except it's illegal to use age, race, religion, sexual orientation and other such things as qualifiers for jobs. Except in the movie industry because you wouldn't hire a black person to play an Asian. You missed the point and wanted to sound smart but you're wrong and silly.

−1

SadLaser t1_j66yi1s wrote

Basically everything you're saying isn't true. Factually inaccurate. For multiple reasons. First of all, many jobs have age requirements. Many things in this world have different ranges where you can't do it until after a certain age. Perfectly legal. Also, other industries other than movies, including TV, radio, modeling, etc exist and do the same things. Sports and athletics related jobs have gender requirements. So even if we want to pretend that what you're saying isn't BS (it is BS), then it's still wrong because it's not only movies.

Next, OP specifically says the word discriminate. Discrimination is unjust/prejudicial treatment of people based on their given categories. It isn't unjust or prejudiced to pick a person based on their age, race, gender, etc for a role in a film. It's appropriate for the work that is being done. Which is my point. You're the one missing the point trying to have a Reddit "gotcha" moment and you failed.

1