Last night I posted a blog in which I addressed “Shelli’s” comments about Geno’s in Philly.  She was upset and expressed herself rather forcefully, which I rebutted.

Today she wrote me in response, and took the time to express what she disagrees with in a much clearly manner.

I’m glad.  As another commenter said, ” It’s nice when, every once in a while, someone who leaves nasty comments realizes that perhaps they did not phrase their opposition properly, and returns to discussing rather than arguing.”

I agree. 

But that goofy mind of mine was still churning and it occurred to me that perhaps there is a disconnect here we are ignoring.

Simply put, Shelli disliked the fact that Joe’s sign was in essence discriminatory.   I kind of agree.

Now, in my response to her today, I noted that there was what is essentially a tongue and cheek element to the sign asking people to order in English, that being that if you don’t understand English to a degree, how would you know he wants you to order in English?  It isn’t as if he posted his request in 14 common languages.  He posted it in English.

I think his sign was geared to those who speak English but prefer to order in (for example) Spanish.  He prefers they do not.  His sign was really primarily addressed to immigrants, and likely illegal immigrants.

Was it discriminatory?  Perhaps it was, though he does take the time to teach anyone the English phrases necessary.   So it is not like anyone has actually been refused.

But then a stray thought occurred to me.  Why is being discriminatory bad?

We shy away from any suggestion that we discriminate, but our society is filled with discrimination.

I would argue that the word discrimination gets a bad rap.

Let’s say we decide Joe has discriminated against us by not letting me order a cheese steak in Farsi. How is that a violation of any law but the laws of courtesy?  Oh yes, we pass anti discrimination laws, and some of them make sense, such as housing laws.