Funny to think back to a time when rickyg would routinely wish cancer

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sir C

What about calling monty a 'tight ****'? That might be e reference to his religion or his transgenderness. :nod:

---

or just a statement of fact :shrug:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sir C

What about calling monty a 'tight ****'? That might be e reference to his religion or his transgenderness. :nod:

---

its all dodgy ground, sc

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Alberto Balsam Rodriguez

Excellent...so my boss's has to fill space in SE London and had chosen my team.... Some permie staff who are from an ethnic monitor and a bunch of contractors. I intend to claim discrimination on the grounds of race.

---

if you can prove the reason for selection for the move is race. yes.

The link only has to be tenuous, of course; the burden of proof will lie with the employer.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SWv2

What about benching, is that out also?

---

what is this benching, sw?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by IUFG

what is this benching, sw?

---

Isn't it to do with sucking semen out of a man's bottom using a straw? :-(

Irish. They only have two TV channels so they have to make their own entertainment.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sir C

Isn't it to do with sucking semen out of a man's bottom using a straw? :-(

Irish. They only have two TV channels so they have to make their own entertainment.

---

Straws are the devil’s tool Dutch.

About 20m of them fall into the sea every day and kill dolphins or something like that.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SWv2

Straws are the devil’s tool Dutch.

About 20m of them fall into the sea every day and kill dolphins or something like that.

---

I believe the fully woke felcher now owns a reusable metal straw.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sir C

I believe the fully woke felcher now owns a reusable metal straw.

---

your knowledge in these areas is admirable, sc. Yesterday, it was anal rape, today felching.

wd, sc, imo

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by IUFG

your knowledge in these areas is admirable, sc. Yesterday, it was anal rape, today felching.

wd, sc, imo

---

ty, i. The benefits of a rounded education, you see.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sir C

I believe the fully woke felcher now owns a reusable metal straw.

---

Surely a metal straw is just a pipe?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SWv2

Surely a metal straw is just a pipe?

---

We'd need Herb to rule on this one, sw. He's the expert in pipes. And sucking jizz out of men's arses.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sir C

ty, i. The benefits of a rounded education, you see.

---

quite.

Worked in Brighton, went to a boarding school, of course he's a gayer, etc...

interesting (if you are into that sort of thing) case law re: discrimination by perception in this case.

English v Thomas Sanderson Ltd

The issue in the appeal is whether someone who is ribbed or teased – or, it might be said, tormented – by "homophobic banter" (the phrase used in this case) is or may be thereby harassed within the meaning of Regulation 5 when (a) he is not gay, (b) he is not perceived or assumed to be gay by his fellow workers, and (c) he accepts that they do not believe him to be gay.


http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWCA/Civ/2008/1421.html

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by IUFG

quite.

Worked in Brighton, went to a boarding school, of course he's a gayer, etc...

interesting (if you are into that sort of thing) case law re: discrimination by perception in this case.

English v Thomas Sanderson Ltd

The issue in the appeal is whether someone who is ribbed or teased – or, it might be said, tormented – by "homophobic banter" (the phrase used in this case) is or may be thereby harassed within the meaning of Regulation 5 when (a) he is not gay, (b) he is not perceived or assumed to be gay by his fellow workers, and (c) he accepts that they do not believe him to be gay.


http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWCA/Civ/2008/1421.html

---

That's the trouble with having laws qua laws. So much in life is open to interpretation.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sir C

So much in life is open to interpretation.

---

especially homophobic bantz. A great effort as a defence imo

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by IUFG

quite.

Worked in Brighton, went to a boarding school, of course he's a gayer, etc...

interesting (if you are into that sort of thing) case law re: discrimination by perception in this case.

English v Thomas Sanderson Ltd

The issue in the appeal is whether someone who is ribbed or teased – or, it might be said, tormented – by "homophobic banter" (the phrase used in this case) is or may be thereby harassed within the meaning of Regulation 5 when (a) he is not gay, (b) he is not perceived or assumed to be gay by his fellow workers, and (c) he accepts that they do not believe him to be gay.


http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWCA/Civ/2008/1421.html

---

"Lord Nicholls of Birkenhead"

:hehe:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SWv2

"Lord Nicholls of Birkenhead"

:hehe:

---

Birkenhead. Now there is a fúcking shíthole.

Still, better than Liverpool.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sir C

on random strangers, and get away with it. That shít will now get you jailed.

Remember, kids:

"A Hate Crime is defined as "Any criminal offence which is perceived by the victim or any other person, to be motivated by hostility or prejudice based on a person's race or perceived race; religion or perceived religion; sexual orientation or perceived sexual orientation; disability or perceived disability and any crime motivated by hostility or prejudice against a person who is transgender or perceived to be transgender."

A Hate Incident is any incident which the victim, or anyone else, thinks is based on someone’s prejudice towards them because of their race, religion, sexual orientation, disability or because they are transgender."

Call someone a ****, and if, in their or someone else's opinion, your reasons for doing so are non-PC, you have committed a criminal offence.

How on earth have we ended up in this place?

---

In practice, its actually even worse than that. The hate crime can be based purely on the use of a word, even if there is precisely no correlation between the word and the victim, e.g. Using an offensive word relating to black people Whilst threatening to lamp a white bloke. There doesnt need to be any correlation between the term and the victim.