Patting the wrists, rolling the eyes.

[Shape Shifter]

Originally posted by bilmore
Just last month, my b-i-l (a dep county sheriff) was complaining that he had been told to staff night jail rotations with a more gender-balanced mix than what he had been doing.

So, I don't know about "humoring feminists", but, maybe, "not getting sued"?

(ETA - So, I guess, yeah, sharp as a tack.)

Hank fights like a girl.

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally posted by bilmore
Just last month, my b-i-l (a dep county sheriff) was complaining that he had been told to staff night jail rotations with a more gender-balanced mix than what he had been doing.

So, I don't know about "humoring feminists", but, maybe, "not getting sued"?

(ETA - So, I guess, yeah, sharp as a tack.)

Was he told that by the feminists? Never mind -- let's just assume it was Andrea Dworkin herself. Carry on.

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally posted by Not Bob
Not that it will change anything Ann or any other antifeminist will say, but as I understand it, the Atlanta courthouse guards didn't carry guns for precisely the reason that prisoners could try to take them. The guard did have keys to a lock box which had a gun. What happened was that dude subdued the guard, took her keys, unlocked the box, took the gun, and then went on his rampage. All of these actions were observed by security cameras -- but no one was monitoring the cameras. That's more the problem, it seems to me, than the fact that the guard was a woman. If it was a guy, the same thing could have happened.

Stop humoring the feminists, Not Bob.

[bilmore]

Originally posted by Tyrone Slothrop
Was he told that by the feminists? Never mind -- let's just assume it was Andrea Dworkin herself. Carry on.

Cheap response, Ty, but I suppose sarcasm helps in the absence of substance. He was told that by superiors who did not want to be accused of gender bias. He did not like it, because women in the jail unit at night get challenged much more frequently than men.

[ltl/fb]

Originally posted by bilmore
Cheap response, Ty, but I suppose sarcasm helps in the absence of substance. He was told that by superiors who did not want to be accused of gender bias. He did not like it, because women in the jail unit at night get challenged much more frequently than men.

Um, now that we have been provided with more facts in the Atlanta situation that sparked this discussion, any comments?

And what if black male personnel were challenged more than white male personnel (or vice versa)? Same thing -- shouldn't assign them?

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally posted by bilmore
Cheap response, Ty, but I suppose sarcasm helps in the absence of substance. He was told that by superiors who did not want to be accused of gender bias. He did not like it, because women in the jail unit at night get challenged much more frequently than men.

Well, you didn't say that, so I think my cheap response was appropriate.

As Not Bob said, it has sounded like there were all sorts of problems with security in the Atlanta courthouse, so it seems a little ridiculous to be pointing the finger at feminists. Unless, of course, you're Ann Coulter.

[bilmore]

Originally posted by ltl/fb
Um, now that we have been provided with more facts in the Atlanta situation that sparked this discussion, any comments?

And what if black male personnel were challenged more than white male personnel (or vice versa)? Same thing -- shouldn't assign them?

My comment was a response to Ty's cheap throw-away, no more. I knew the Atlanta situation - they had a reasonably good setup that just didn't work, as all solutions sometimes fail.

As to the black-v-white thing? Wc currently assign officers based on race to specific blocks in the jail - because smart jails segregate the prisoners by race. It keeps more people alive. (But See the dumb SC.)

It's an implerfect world.

[Hank Chinaski]

Originally posted by ltl/fb
Um, now that we have been provided with more facts in the Atlanta situation that sparked this discussion, any comments?

And what if black male personnel were challenged more than white male personnel (or vice versa)? Same thing -- shouldn't assign them?

All the facts? Ummm no. Did this guard have nice big titties? That would play into whether the boy guards would want her around, wouldn't it?

[ltl/fb]

Originally posted by bilmore
My comment was a response to Ty's cheap throw-away, no more. I knew the Atlanta situation - they had a reasonably good setup that just didn't work, as all solutions sometimes fail.

As to the black-v-white thing? Wc currently assign officers based on race to specific blocks in the jail - because smart jails segregate the prisoners by race. It keeps more people alive. (But See the dumb SC.)

It's an implerfect world.

OK. I was just curious if you were okay with the racial stuff as well as the sex stuff. I'm sure you can see how it could also be a believable pretext too, though, and that people should be careful. Like, what if non-Lutherans got more crap than Lutherans, etc. etc.

[Secret_Agent_Man]

Originally posted by Not Bob
If it was a guy, the same thing could have happened.

Not Bob is correct, per usual.

And if it were Hank and Sidd, someone would have been tossing the salad.

S_A_M

[bilmore]

Originally posted by ltl/fb
Like, what if non-Lutherans got more crap than Lutherans, etc. etc.

That would only be natural.

[Not Bob]

Originally posted by bilmore
My comment was a response to Ty's cheap throw-away, no more. I knew the Atlanta situation - they had a reasonably good setup that just didn't work, as all solutions sometimes fail.

And, I don't speak for Ty, but I think that his comment may have been in response to Ann Coulter's cheap and factually inaccurate throw-away charge laying fault at the feet of the feminists. She obviously didn't want any of those pesky facts (like the fact that the guard didn't carry a gun) to get in the way of her larger truths. Big shock.

[ltl/fb]

Originally posted by bilmore
That would only be natural.

Nice if it pushes you out of the job. "We can't have McFlint [getting overtime/time and a half for] working nights -- the prisoners don't like dirty micks."

I'm not saying women don't get more crap, I'm just pointing out that it can be a pretext. Presumably there are some kind of requirements as to a level of physical strength and ability to use whatever weapons/tools are necessary for the job, and no man OR woman who doesn't meet them can have the job.

[Secret_Agent_Man]

Originally posted by bilmore
He did not like it, because women in the jail unit at night get challenged much more frequently than men.

And that is the issue -- "challenged more frequently" -- due to perceptions of vulnerability not necessarily connected to actual ability to take care of oneself. Still, that is a legitimate concern for employers who desire/need mainly to keep the peace and avoid trouble.

For example, I once saw an advertisement in the newspaper some years back (mid-1990s) in which a large, well-known, rowdy area "gentlemen's club" was seeking bouncers. The job advertisement not only specified gender, but minimum height and weight requirements.

I am a man who is well above the national average in size -- perhaps even larger than Sidd or Hank. Still, I barely cleared those minimums. It has been explained to me that, for such jobs, they want people so large and scary looking that even drunk and horny young guys will not _think_ to start trouble. A smaller man (or any woman), even one with two or three black belts who could kick ass, would not be suitable for the job because the drunk would think: "Yeah, I could take him" and give it a try. The goal is to minimize fights, not just to win them.

I can see the same argument applying to certain law enforcement jobs -- but the problem is that this camel's nose opens the door to a return to non-essential height/weight/strength requirements that caused all male police and fire depatrtments for decades.

S_A_M

[bilmore]

Originally posted by ltl/fb
I'm not saying women don't get more crap, I'm just pointing out that it can be a pretext. Presumably there are some kind of requirements as to a level of physical strength and ability to use whatever weapons/tools are necessary for the job, and no man OR woman who doesn't meet them can have the job.

Agreed. It's a tough line, but I think the line must still be determined. The idea of just not trying to figure out what's pretext and what's needed results in too much harm.