datan said:how is it discriminatory when everyone has exactly the same right?
It comes down to the architecture of the mutual.
If if what you need is built into that architecture; if your nature is reflected in that architecture: then you are included.
If what you need is not built into that architecture; if your nature is not reflected in that archirecture: then you are exluded.
Standard inclusion stuff.
Where one sub-constituency has crafted the mutual in their own image: then other subconstituencies generally have to fight their way in to inclusion; prejudice by prejudice.
Upvote
0