Women getting drafted equally as men... - Page 2

johnny · 03-24-2005, 01:47 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by shamrock_uk:
Because life isn't as simple as that? This particular women wouldn't have decided to become a fighter pilot had she known she was going to have a baby in two years time.

It's very easy to say that they 'never intend to' but of course preferences change as circumstances change.

This could easily be avoided though

Uncle Sam: so you want to be a fighterpilot
F18Betty: Yessir
Uncle Sam: Any chance you'll be pregnant in the coming years ?
F18Betty: errrr..
Uncle Sam: Next !

Larry_OHF · 03-24-2005, 02:41 PM

But from a business viewpoint, TL can confirm that questions like that are illegal to ask a potential employee.

johnny · 03-24-2005, 03:10 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Larry_OHF:
But from a business viewpoint, TL can confirm that questions like that are illegal to ask a potential employee.

We're talking about national interrests here, how could that be illegal ? I'm not asking for a lecture in legal law here, but i really think the question i posted in jest isn't that silly to begin with. Wouldn't it be weird if the USAF can't deploy a certain squadron because it's pilots are in labor ?

Luvian · 03-24-2005, 03:12 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Timber Loftis:
Yes, but a woman who was not pregnant and never intended to be could be a fine aircraft pilot. Women and men are physically different. But, then again, there are 180lb muscled women and 120 lb. weakling men. So, rather than make distinctions based on gender, why don't we just set physical standards for those jobs that require a certain physical makeup and skillset requirements for those jobs that require certain skills. Works in every other industry.

Did I tell you it's good to have you back... [img]smile.gif[/img]

johnny · 03-24-2005, 03:20 PM

You got paid to say that right ? [img]tongue.gif[/img]

shamrock_uk · 03-24-2005, 03:25 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by johnny:

quote:
Originally posted by Larry_OHF:
But from a business viewpoint, TL can confirm that questions like that are illegal to ask a potential employee.

We're talking about national interrests here, how could that be illegal ? I'm not asking for a lecture in legal law here, but i really think the question i posted in jest isn't that silly to begin with. Wouldn't it be weird if the USAF can't deploy a certain squadron because it's pilots are in labor ? [/QUOTE]Personally, I quite agree with you. Seeing as we're all men discussing women in the third person, are there any women on IW who would care to disagree/offer their opinions?

Timber Loftis · 03-24-2005, 03:34 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Luvian:
Did I tell you it's good to have you back... [img]smile.gif[/img]

Your homage and kind words are duly noted and appreciated.
(and the check is in the mail)

[ 03-24-2005, 03:35 PM: Message edited by: Timber Loftis ]

johnny · 03-24-2005, 03:47 PM

Pffft...lawyers...

shamrock_uk · 04-21-2005, 07:14 PM

Sorry to drag this back up, but I was looking at the fitness requirements for Royal Air Force training and it says you have to be able to run 1 1/2 miles in these times before you can apply to join:

I just don't get how they can do this. Both from a logical point of view (is this a minimum requirement or not??) and from a discrimination point of view (it's illegal to discriminate according to gender in the UK).

Furthermore, it doesn't really do much for the emancipation of women either since every man there is going to see that she has to do less and will therefore suspect she isn't 'pulling her weight'.

[ 04-21-2005, 07:15 PM: Message edited by: shamrock_uk ]

Morgeruat · 04-21-2005, 10:14 PM

It is a good question, and the US military has similar rules, the Army uses a 2-mile standar, the Air Force uses 1 1/2 miles, and I don't know about the navy and marines. The standards are different simply because physiologically women are different, they build muscle in different places, have different centers of gravity, etc and providing one set standard while ideally more useful doesn't reflect the same level of fitness between the genders (or among differing age groups). The standards aren't so much for making sure that you can cover a certain amount of area in a certain amount of time, but rather to make sure that people maintain a uniform level of fitness. {/end fitness spiel}

{edit} it hasn't been my experience that women are looked down for being able to do less, or having less required of them rather, at least from my experience in the Signal corps. (Which may not be totally representative of everyone's experiences with women in the military)

[ 04-21-2005, 10:16 PM: Message edited by: Morgeruat ]

03-24-2005, 03:20 PM	#15
johnny 40th Level Warrior Join Date: April 15, 2002 Location: Utrecht The Netherlands Age: 59 Posts: 16,981	You got paid to say that right ? [img]tongue.gif[/img] __________________

03-24-2005, 03:47 PM	#18
johnny 40th Level Warrior Join Date: April 15, 2002 Location: Utrecht The Netherlands Age: 59 Posts: 16,981	Pffft...lawyers... __________________

04-21-2005, 10:14 PM	#20
Morgeruat Jack Burton Join Date: October 16, 2001 Location: PA Age: 44 Posts: 5,421	It is a good question, and the US military has similar rules, the Army uses a 2-mile standar, the Air Force uses 1 1/2 miles, and I don't know about the navy and marines. The standards are different simply because physiologically women are different, they build muscle in different places, have different centers of gravity, etc and providing one set standard while ideally more useful doesn't reflect the same level of fitness between the genders (or among differing age groups). The standards aren't so much for making sure that you can cover a certain amount of area in a certain amount of time, but rather to make sure that people maintain a uniform level of fitness. {/end fitness spiel} {edit} it hasn't been my experience that women are looked down for being able to do less, or having less required of them rather, at least from my experience in the Signal corps. (Which may not be totally representative of everyone's experiences with women in the military) [ 04-21-2005, 10:16 PM: Message edited by: Morgeruat ] __________________ "Any attempt to cheat, especially with my wife, who is a dirty, dirty, tramp, and I am just gonna snap." Knibb High Principal - Billy Madison

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Pregnant Women	Arvon	General Discussion	3	09-16-2006 07:41 PM
Cars and Women	Grendal	General Conversation Archives (11/2000 - 01/2005)	24	07-14-2003 02:13 PM
Men are better than Women	Avatar	General Conversation Archives (11/2000 - 01/2005)	134	05-06-2002 03:30 PM
for the WOMEN!!	Harkoliar	General Conversation Archives (11/2000 - 01/2005)	4	03-21-2002 08:26 AM
Stupid question from an equally stupid poster... How do you...?	Patty	Baldurs Gate II Archives	1	11-11-2001 09:47 AM

03-24-2005, 02:41 PM	#12
Larry_OHF Ironworks Moderator Join Date: March 1, 2001 Location: Midlands, South Carolina Age: 49 Posts: 14,759	But from a business viewpoint, TL can confirm that questions like that are illegal to ask a potential employee.

04-21-2005, 07:14 PM	#19
shamrock_uk Dracolich Join Date: January 24, 2004 Location: UK Age: 42 Posts: 3,092	Sorry to drag this back up, but I was looking at the fitness requirements for Royal Air Force training and it says you have to be able to run 1 1/2 miles in these times before you can apply to join: I just don't get how they can do this. Both from a logical point of view (is this a minimum requirement or not??) and from a discrimination point of view (it's illegal to discriminate according to gender in the UK). Furthermore, it doesn't really do much for the emancipation of women either since every man there is going to see that she has to do less and will therefore suspect she isn't 'pulling her weight'. [ 04-21-2005, 07:15 PM: Message edited by: shamrock_uk ]

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)