Homophobia at the Premier Inn

msallen

ThumbRemote wrote: »

So Premier Inn could stop black people staying there, as long as they stop ginger haired people too?

Premier Inn have not stopped anyone staying there, as you well know. If you have a genuine case of discrimination then take it up with either the perpetrator or the relevant authorities. If you just have a chip on your shoulder then you'll have to get used to the weight.

Valli

ThumbRemote wrote: »

So Premier Inn could stop black people staying there, as long as they stop ginger haired people too?

bod1467 wrote: »

Irrelevant comparison argument ... PI have not stopped lesbian/gay people from staying, just as they haven't stopped black or ginger-haired people staying - the discussion relates to internet access.

This ^

FWIW anyone using the keyword 'lesbian' in PI would get the same 'access denied' message - not just lesbians.

System

The OP is better taking up her whinge with Arqiva. They supply and manage the system that Premier Inn use and any external access will be via their gateways and filtering systems. As it will probably be a common gateway for a range of businesses then they are not going to !!!!!! about with it because one person can't get to her site

ThumbRemote

Valli wrote: »

This ^

FWIW anyone using the keyword 'lesbian' in PI would get the same 'access denied' message - not just lesbians.

The equalities act contains a provision that a practice is discriminatory if "it puts, or would put, persons with whom B shares the characteristic at a particular disadvantage when compared with persons with whom B does not share it,
and it isn't "a proportionate means of achieving a legitimate aim."

So if the practice of blocking the keyword 'lesbian' put lesbians at a particular disadvantage over non-lesbians then it is discriminatory and illegal. I'd think it's fairly easy to show that this is the case: it makes it impossible to search for lesbian friendly bars, clubs, social networks, etc.

Unless, of course, it's a proportionate measure - which given there are much better internet filters around is unlikely to be the case.

philatio

Just be grateful it's only the Premier Inns.

If the government get their way, the entire internet will be filtered.

Bantex_2

They also block !!!!!! Van Dyke so are obviously Homophobic, Hetrophobic, Dutchophobic and have a thing about Mary Poppins.

They should be locked up.

tomtontom

ThumbRemote wrote: »

The equalities act contains a provision that a practice is discriminatory if "it puts, or would put, persons with whom B shares the characteristic at a particular disadvantage when compared with persons with whom B does not share it,
and it isn't "a proportionate means of achieving a legitimate aim."

So if the practice of blocking the keyword 'lesbian' put lesbians at a particular disadvantage over non-lesbians then it is discriminatory and illegal. I'd think it's fairly easy to show that this is the case: it makes it impossible to search for lesbian friendly bars, clubs, social networks, etc.

Unless, of course, it's a proportionate measure - which given there are much better internet filters around is unlikely to be the case.

Given that all words of a sexual nature are banned, including those of a heterosexual nature, one group is no more disadvantaged than another.

Herbalus

ThumbRemote wrote: »

a practice is discriminatory if... it isn't "a proportionate means of achieving a legitimate aim."

Well, it is exactly that. Their legitimate aim is to stop people, and especially children, accessing adult websites. Blocking the word 'lesbian' is a proportionate means of doing that.

powerful_Rogue

ThumbRemote wrote: »

The equalities act contains a provision that a practice is discriminatory if "it puts, or would put, persons with whom B shares the characteristic at a particular disadvantage when compared with persons with whom B does not share it,
and it isn't "a proportionate means of achieving a legitimate aim."

So if the practice of blocking the keyword 'lesbian' put lesbians at a particular disadvantage over non-lesbians then it is discriminatory and illegal. I'd think it's fairly easy to show that this is the case: it makes it impossible to search for lesbian friendly bars, clubs, social networks, etc.

Unless, of course, it's a proportionate measure - which given there are much better internet filters around is unlikely to be the case.

I would disagree. It appears certain sexual related terms have been blocked to protect young people that may use the WiFi. In their terms ""Harmful to the young public"

ThumbRemote

Herbalus wrote: »

Well, it is exactly that. Their legitimate aim is to stop people, and especially children, accessing adult websites. Blocking the word 'lesbian' is a proportionate means of doing that.

Blocking the word 'lesbian' is certainly a means of doing that. I'm not sure it's proportionate, since there are plenty of alternative ways of blocking adult websites which don't cause discrimination to lesbians.

Of course this is straying into opinion about 'proportionate'. It would depend on a judge and existing case law to fully decide whether this is proportionate.

powerful_Rogue wrote: »

I would disagree. It appears certain sexual related terms have been blocked to protect young people that may use the WiFi. In their terms ""Harmful to the young public"

As above