Re: Non-discrimination in contracts

Damien Broderick (
Thu, 31 Jul 1997 16:30:06 +0000

At 10:57 PM 7/30/97 -0700, Dale wrote:

> employer of trying to
>have his cake and eat it too (say, wanting to profit from the existence of
>a particular sociocultural regime of civility while selectively refusing
>some of its central stipulations).

The crux, cleanly expressed.

But then how may/must this be instantiated? I have a particular distaste
for patchouli oil. When I took up with a certain young person some years
ago, she wore the filthy stuff. I mentioned diffidently how much I
detested its stench (Yetch! Barf!). With a light-hearted cry, she flung
the bottle into the bin and it was never seen or smelled again. I thought
this a charming and generous act. But suppose a new work colleague bathed
in patchoulli, and refused to abandon it. I suppose I could add the scent
of vomit to the air, or just an increasingly bad tempered mien, but that
wouldn't necessarily help. And suppose the colleague agreed to forego the
pong if I chose not to wear my running shoes to work. But damn it, they're
the only comfortable shoes I've ever owned, and they *don't* smell. And
suppose the typical bigotted clients get so uptight at my colleague's
homosexual repertoire, however muted, that they take their business
elsewhere and we're closed down? But suppose it's not gay behaviour they
resent but black skin or Jewish noses? It gets tricky. Optionality
perhaps has something to do with it - you can decide to forego patchouli
without a major identity crisis, but not the folds of your eyes. But what
if your hackers all *jest lerve* to go without bathing and washing their
hair and cleaning their teeth? Yep, it's tricky. Personally I resolve
many of these hazards by working at home, but that's a cheap way out.

Damien Broderick