"CHILDREN UNDER FIVE (5) AND MAIDS ARE NOT ALLOWED"
They didn't say pets. They said maids. That's open discrimination, loud and clear.
Or may be they meant to say maids are not allowed with five year olds but are allowed with, say, six year olds. But that's a long shot.
Hi, I am Nauman Faridi, an IT professional and a Toastmaster from the foothills of Himalayas. Faridinama is a place for me to vent my feelings.
5 comments:
It could be the other way round as well i.e., Children under 5 with Maids are not allowed but Children under 5 without maids are allowed :). HowzThat.
BTW, according to the dictionary, a Maid can be either of these two.
1.A female servant.
2.A girl or young unmarried woman.
Which one of these they are talking about?
It could be that they might have written that 'children under five are not allowed'. The members might have brought the maids with them to take care of their children under five, so the library administration have changed the notice to include the 'maids'.
I think its is not a discrimination issue.
Well, if this notice is just to avoid maids taking care of children under five, then it should be like
"MAIDS WITH CHILDREN UNDER FIVE (5) ARE NOT ALLOWED"
OR
"CHILDREN UNDER FIVE AND MAIDS WITH CHILDREN UNDER FIVE ARE NOT ALLOWED"
It is DISCRIMINATION.
They might have forgot to put the quotes around :)
It could be mistaken. They might wanted to say "Maids with children under 5 are not allowed." If thts not the case then it is surely discrimination.
Post a Comment