It technically does discriminate, since discriminate means to "recognise a distinction" between two things. Just because it is a nasty sounding word doesn't mean it has a nasty meaning. And although smogard's proverb about tampons certainly left something to be desired on the intellectual front, he has actually (and possible inadvertently) stumbled on the heart of the matter; "how can we give equality when we are not all equal and how can we avoid prejudice without causing inconveniences and complications?".

We must discern between people to equalise their opportunities or standard if living but then we would need to give more to those who are naturally unhappy or just incompetent, thus maintains equality of living standards but not equality of treatment or judgement. Aside from the implementation of such a system being completely impossible, it is far from ideal on a wholly moral level since some people who deserve more would get less than those who need more. The opposite of this system is simply to treat everyone the same and this just leads to people creating their own equality, for a while work might be equivalent to reward but with new generations being born eventually some people would be doomed to a substandard existence.

The solution? I don't know, but maybe a balance of both, where those who need more are given enough but not as much as those who earn more. As long as education and employment support those born into families with less, equality, or at least something resembling equality, might as least be close.

I don't know why I am writing like an egomaniac, maybe I just am one. I would appreciate it if someone could prove my propositions wrong so I can stop being so arrogant.

In the context of equality, discrimination is based in prejudice since equality is all about the dominance and oppression between categories of people.


This goes back to my point about fair treatment. Don't take equality too literally. Literal equal treatment sometimes isn't possible. In this discussion, sex has been raised as an example. In cases like this we resort to fair, common sense treatment.


So long as prejudice doesn't restrict the equal rights and opportunities of people, then prejudice is fair game. When it does, I'm not sure what inconveniences and complications you're referring to.