Template talk:Discrimination sidebar

WikiProject Discrimination (Rated Template-class)
WikiProject iconThis template is within the scope of WikiProject Discrimination, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Discrimination on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
 Template  This template does not require a rating on the quality scale.

Infidel tax[]

Would an article about a tax imposed on non-believers of a given religion be a reasonable candidate? Some think not?

Meat eating as discrimination[]

Why is Meat Eating listed under Manifestations of Discrimination? After a quick glance at the linked article (Meat), I don't see anything that would warrant its inclusion. 2606:A000:C8C4:4F00:A161:95F5:F4E2:2138 (talk) 20:27, 19 October 2017 (UTC)

I didn't add meat eating, but meat eating is clearly a manifestation of speciesism, which is listed in the "General forms" section of this template. Meat eaters are speciesists who discriminate against nonhuman animals who have a level of sentience comparable to that of human animals: See Sentience § Animal welfare, rights, and sentience. Biogeographist (talk) 14:02, 20 October 2017 (UTC)
I will change the link to Meat eating in this template to a piped link to Ethics of eating meat to address the criticism above that the article on meat is of unclear relevance. Also, it is better that links in navboxes not be redirects (as the unpiped link meat eating is), as explained at WP:Redirect § Bypass redirects in navigational templates. Biogeographist (talk) 15:45, 20 October 2017 (UTC)
This remains contended, including in the ethical literature—some maintain that there are non-arbitrary reasons for this differential treatment of nonhumans. (Peter Singer, for example, has argued that eating humanely raised and painlessly slaughtered chickens need not be an instance of speciesism.) However, consensus on this page seems to be for a broad criterion for inclusion, something like "topics considered relevant to debates about discrimination" (e.g. section above on feminism), so ethics of eating meat seems adequately justified. FourViolas (talk) 15:56, 20 October 2017 (UTC)
@FourViolas: Thanks for the clarification. Instead of saying "meat eating is clearly a manifestation of speciesism" as I said in my comment above, I should have said something like: "the logic here seems to be that meat eating is a manifestation of speciesism". As you noted, the criteria for inclusion seems to be very broad for this template; if the inclusion criteria were narrower then it would be easier to make a case for excluding meat eating, but given the broad inclusion criteria, if speciesism is included then one would have to present a better argument than has yet been presented for excluding meat eating as a (at least potential) manifestation of speciesism. A counterpoint to Peter Singer's argument cited above is Mylan Engel's argument: Engel Jr., Mylan (2000). "The immorality of eating meat". In Pojman, Louis P. The moral life: an introductory reader in ethics and literature. Oxford; New York: Oxford University Press. pp. 856–890. ISBN 0195128443. OCLC 40105675.  Biogeographist (talk) 16:10, 20 October 2017 (UTC)
Agree. Peter Singer bases his arguments primarily on utilitarianism principle. The works of philosophers like Tom Regan, Gary L. Francione, and others are more scholarly when it comes to ethical arguments against speciesism (to talk about the ethics of eating meat) and more ethical stance on veganism. Arguing about animal rights or meat eating any less than the abolitionist theory will only question the validity of the abolition of slavery. Rasnaboy (talk) 08:28, 21 October 2017 (UTC)
Eating meat is a form of animal cruelty, by discriminating against the animals and certain species of animals to be precise. It is hypocrisy to cry for one's pet dog or cat while engaging in the cruelty of devouring the cows, pigs, ducks, fishes and other animals by turning the stomach into a graveyard for the rotting carcasses. (talk) 18:10, 24 May 2018 (UTC)


Feminism is included as a countermeasure. To be egalitarian and fair to men's rights, please add Masculism as a countermeasure. (talk) 18:06, 24 May 2018 (UTC)

 Done Thanks. Rasnaboy (talk) 14:26, 5 June 2018 (UTC)