Patting the wrists, rolling the eyes. - Page 43

bilmore · 03-17-2005, 05:01 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Secret_Agent_Man
And that is the issue -- "challenged more frequently" -- due to perceptions of vulnerability not necessarily connected to actual ability to take care of oneself.

I think I know what you're saying, but I'm worried that someone will now read it as saying that the 4'9" woman can do the guard/prisoner-control job as well as the 6' guy, as long as we perceive her to be as able. 'Taint so. (Likewise for the 4'9" guy, of course.)

ltl/fb · 03-17-2005, 05:03 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by bilmore
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.

If there are already those strength/skill requirements in place, why should female guards (who have to have met the requirements in order to have the job) be excluded from guarding the jail (and, specifically, at night, but not during the day)?

ltl/fb · 03-17-2005, 05:04 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by bilmore
I think I know what you're saying, but I'm worried that someone will now read it as saying that the 4'9" woman can do the guard/prisoner-control job as well as the 6' guy, as long as we perceive her to be as able. 'Taint so. (Likewise for the 4'9" guy, of course.)

Have all strength-type requirements been abolished and now the rule is "perceive"?

Hank Chinaski · 03-17-2005, 05:08 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by ltl/fb
Have all strength-type requirements been abolished and now the rule is "perceive"?

now you're just trolling for a "objective maximum weight" comment, aren't you? Well, the nice new hank won't go there.

ltl/fb · 03-17-2005, 05:10 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Hank Chinaski
now you're just trolling for a "objective maximum weight" comment, aren't you? Well, the nice new hank won't go there.

Puh-leaze. I have no worries. I can just sit on them.

bilmore · 03-17-2005, 05:10 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by ltl/fb
Have all strength-type requirements been abolished and now the rule is "perceive"?

Answering both posts - best example is the firefighter situation. Strength and speed requirements were in place for years - which excluded almost all women. Court rulings started to say, requirements are thus invalid. Too much of an outcry, (because they were job-related requirements), so subsequent rulings began to change the scope and harshness of the requirements, to the point where a large percentage of the women taking the test could pass.

So, basically, there still are tests, but they pretty much just exclude the halt.

ltl/fb · 03-17-2005, 05:13 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by bilmore
Answering both posts - best example is the firefighter situation. Strength and speed requirements were in place for years - which excluded almost all women. Court rulings started to say, requirements are thus invalid. Too much of an outcry, (because they were job-related requirements), so subsequent rulings began to change the scope and harshness of the requirements, to the point where a large percentage of the women taking the test could pass.

So, basically, there still are tests, but they pretty much just exclude the halt.

Quit with the fancy talk, Harvard-boy.

Are a lot of firefighters now incapable of doing their jobs? Or had the bars been set higher than they needed to be? I tend not to read the sad stuff in the paper, but I don't see a lot of stories about "people burned to death in building because firefighters [no matter which sex] not capable of rescuing them because too weak."

bilmore · 03-17-2005, 05:32 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by ltl/fb
Quit with the fancy talk, Harvard-boy.

Are a lot of firefighters now incapable of doing their jobs? Or had the bars been set higher than they needed to be? I tend not to read the sad stuff in the paper, but I don't see a lot of stories about "people burned to death in building because firefighters [no matter which sex] not capable of rescuing them because too weak."

Depends on who you talk to. I don't think the job doesn't get done - but I have heard (second, third hand) that some of the guys resent having to do the bulk of the heavy lifting - which, of course, could simply be an attitude problem about women on "a guy's job", too.

I can tell you that the comp reports for the women in those jobs aren't good. Lots of strain injuries.

Hank Chinaski · 03-17-2005, 05:58 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by ltl/fb
Quit with the fancy talk, Harvard-boy.

Are a lot of firefighters now incapable of doing their jobs? Or had the bars been set higher than they needed to be? I tend not to read the sad stuff in the paper, but I don't see a lot of stories about "people burned to death in building because firefighters [no matter which sex] not capable of rescuing them because too weak."

I've heard stories that if we didn't have so many chick soldiers we would have gotten to Baghdad BEFORE they moved the WMDs.

Sexual Harassment Panda · 03-17-2005, 06:07 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Hank Chinaski
I've heard stories that if we didn't have so many chick soldiers we would have gotten to Baghdad BEFORE they moved the WMDs.

I never thought I'd see the day that Hank criticized Bush's Iraq war strategy.

Spanky · 03-17-2005, 06:30 PM

When I was living in Japan, new clubs in Roppongi (place full of night clubs where all the gaijin hung out) would always hire Japanese body guards. Despite the influence of video games and movies, there is not much violence in Japan. Most Japanese males have never been in a fight. These bouncers were always trained in martial arts and had "security" certificates. In most of the clubs in Japan, they have sections where girls can sit and guys are not allowed. To make it so the girls don't have to be harassed. There was always some drunk Marine or Australian that didn't like to be told to leave the "grils" section and they would hospitalize the poor Japanese body guard who told them to leave. Then the club would hire some Yakuza (Japanese gangsters who are supposed to be tough) and then the Yakusa would get pummeled also. Finally the club would hire some large american servicemen in their off hours and order would be restored. But in the three years I was there I must have seen fifteen clubs go through this evolution.

Tyrone Slothrop · 03-17-2005, 06:44 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Not Bob
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.

Aw, hell, on this issue you can speak for me.

Tyrone Slothrop · 03-17-2005, 06:46 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Hank Chinaski
I've heard stories that if we didn't have so many chick soldiers we would have gotten to Baghdad BEFORE they moved the WMDs.

POTD. Bravo!

Replaced_Texan · 03-17-2005, 06:46 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Replaced_Texan
Two days ago, Texas Children's Hospital in Houston removed a baby from life support contrary to the mom's wishes. The baby was born with a type of dwarfism where his lungs and heart weren't going to grow, and he was on artificial breathing for six months. According to the hospital, his death was only a matter of time, and there was nothing anyone could do for him. Everything was done in accordance with Texas law (finding that treatment is inappropriate by a physician, careful review and agreement by the facility ethics committee), and the mom had ten days to find alternate care for him. Apparently she contacted 40 neonatal units and no one would take him.

The case brought a lot of attention to local media, but I didn't really see any national coverage, which sort of surprised me in light of the Shavio case. Poor baby.

ETA: I always find an interesting dichotomy between the right-to-life and right-to-healthcare. No one ever talks about how much it costs to keep the life support systems going, and yet losing the cuts on Medicaid was a major hit to the Republicans today.

More on the Texas law and this particular case by one of the bill's drafters.

Tyrone Slothrop · 03-17-2005, 06:46 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Spanky
When I was living in Japan, new clubs in Roppongi (place full of night clubs where all the gaijin hung out) would always hire Japanese body guards. Despite the influence of video games and movies, there is not much violence in Japan. Most Japanese males have never been in a fight. These bouncers were always trained in martial arts and had "security" certificates. In most of the clubs in Japan, they have sections where girls can sit and guys are not allowed. To make it so the girls don't have to be harassed. There was always some drunk Marine or Australian that didn't like to be told to leave the "grils" section and they would hospitalize the poor Japanese body guard who told them to leave. Then the club would hire some Yakuza (Japanese gangsters who are supposed to be tough) and then the Yakusa would get pummeled also. Finally the club would hire some large american servicemen in their off hours and order would be restored. But in the three years I was there I must have seen fifteen clubs go through this evolution.

Hank is pretty sure those clubs were just created that way. It's a Shinto thing; you wouldn't understand.