Let’s get real: making fun of someone for having red hair – “gingerism” – might feel like harmless ribbing to some. But for those on the receiving end? It’s humiliating and sometimes dangerous. So why does hair colour, something you have zero control over, not qualify as a protected characteristic under UK law? Spoiler alert: there’s no good legal reason – just historical oversight.
What Counts as a “Protected Characteristic” in the UK?
The Equality Act 2010 outlines nine protected characteristics: age; disability; gender reassignment; marriage and civil partnership; pregnancy and maternity; race; religion or belief; sex; and sexual orientation. Hair colour doesn’t make the list. That means being red-haired isn’t legally shielded from mockery or bullying (scholarworks.umass.edu).
To be clear: discrimination based on hair doesn’t fall under these protections, even if you’re born with it. Yes, that’s as silly as it sounds (ACAS, Wikipedia).
The History – Is “Gingerism” Rooted in Anti-Irish Sentiment?
Here’s where it gets interesting – and ugly. Red hair is statistically most common among people of Irish descent, and long-standing stereotypes have played on that fact – portraying redheads as hot-tempered, mischievous, even subhuman.
According to prevailing stereotypes, the Irish were “savage” or “backward,” often ridiculed or marginalised due to religion, nationality, or ethnicity. These attitudes crept into how society viewed redheads – especially in Britain (Wikipedia).
On top of that, red hair has carried cultural baggage for centuries – ranging from medieval witch-temptress tropes to Judas-associated anti-Semitic imagery, reinforcing that “otherness” vibe (Wikipedia).
So Why Isn’t Hair Colour Protected?
- Legal inertia: The Equality Act, as sweeping as it is, still leans on the traditional list of characteristics. Hair colour just wasn’t deemed necessary – or maybe it was too trivial to bother with.
- No institutional discrimination link: Unlike race or religion, which have deep-rooted systemic discrimination histories, lawmakers haven’t recognised hair colour as carrying the same institutional legacy – even if real people suffer for it.
- Campaign fatigue: Efforts to expand the law, like petitions to include hair colour, have not carried much weight. They remain fringe demands (UK Parliament petition).
What’s the Real-World Impact?
Red-haired people have endured shockingly abusive treatment in the UK – from playground taunts to severe physical assaults – even murder. It’s not made up; these stories are real (Wikipedia).
A 2014 UK study found that over 90% of red-haired men reported being bullied because of their hair; only slightly fewer women saw similar discrimination. That’s not “just jokes” – that’s targeted abuse based on something you’re born with (Wikipedia).
The Bottom Line
It’s absurd – but “gingerism” isn’t legally wrong in the UK, even though it’s rooted in prejudice linked to real historical discrimination. If you’re born with it, you should expect better – legally and socially.
Maybe it’s time we ask ourselves: if we legislate to protect groups based on race and religion, doesn’t it make sense to at least consider hair colour too – especially given how badly people suffer for it? No one’s asking for over-the-top action – just fairness.
Disclaimer: This article is for information only and does not constitute legal advice.
Be First to Comment