Women in the work place: don't hire them and avoid them

Originally posted by SquallX
Here’s one that happens too me, though I didnt really get in trouble in the end because I was in the right.

We ruck x amount of miles every Thursday, with the minimum weight being 35 pounds. So Supply wanted to ruck with us, we say sure.

Comes Thursday, we’re all line up, 35 was up to 45 pound, private showed up with a far smaller ruck then us, weighted it, it’s only 20 pound. I am like what the **** private? We put it out last night we’re to pack a 45 pound ruck, she gave me an attitude, I got pissed and I told her to start pushing. Not ten push up into it, she’s already tired.

Fast forward, we went for 5 miles. She could barely keep, we usually do five miles around 45 min, because of her, we finished it an 1 hr and 30 minutes. All she did was complain how tired she was, and why are we running. And I’ll indid was hell at her and tell her to ****ing shut up and keep rucking.

Fast forward at 0900 first call, I get called into 1SG office to explain why I was picking on her.

I like i said, didn’t really get in trouble, but a woman can destroy your career pretty quickly. Plus it’s a double standard, because if a guy were to complain, he would be the one being talk too because it’s what he signed up for.

This is a classic story and it comes in many different forms.

I don't like excuses for why you can't get the job done. I want to hear solutions to how you're going to get the job done.

Originally posted by Putinbot1
Women aged 35 to 50 who have a family are the best and hardest working employees out there. They will do any extra work to keep the family financially secure.

🙄

Forget Christmas...Bring on the New Holiday.. The Menstruation Celebration!

YouTube video

Originally posted by dadudemon
This is a classic story and it comes in many different forms.

I don't like excuses for why you can't get the job done. I want to hear solutions to how you're going to get the job done.

It’s becoming more frequent in my line of work since we’re trying to integrate females into combat arms.

Originally posted by Flyattractor
[b]Forget Christmas...Bring on the New Holiday.. The Menstruation Celebration!

YouTube video [/B]

Love that guy. He could take a 1 and a half minute video, and turn it into an hour rant.

Originally posted by Adam_PoE
Chauvinists see women as targets, and misogynists see women as threats; both are sexists.

Following is the situation:

[1] Women see women as targets and threats
[2] Men see women as targets and threats
[3] Women see men as targets and threats
[4] Men see men as targets and threats

Welcome to the realm of Wall Street or the Corporate World in general.

Every PERSON is SEXIST to a degree in reality.

Originally posted by dadudemon
And the worst yet are SJWs who see women as weak, pitiful, dumb, and in need of coddling. 🙁

Women are just as capable of harming other people as men, and can take care of themselves. They don't need a man's protection to cope with challenges of life.

Originally posted by S_W_LeGenD
Absolutely.

Women are just as capable of harming other people as men, and can take care of themselves. They don't need a man's protection to cope with challenges of life.

If Women Ran the World there would be Less Wars, but Assassinations would be Way WAY more Frequent.

Originally posted by SquallX
Here’s one that happens too me, though I didnt really get in trouble in the end because I was in the right.

We ruck x amount of miles every Thursday, with the minimum weight being 35 pounds. So Supply wanted to ruck with us, we say sure.

Comes Thursday, we’re all line up, 35 was up to 45 pound, private showed up with a far smaller ruck then us, weighted it, it’s only 20 pound. I am like what the **** private? We put it out last night we’re to pack a 45 pound ruck, she gave me an attitude, I got pissed and I told her to start pushing. Not ten push up into it, she’s already tired.

Fast forward, we went for 5 miles. She could barely keep, we usually do five miles around 45 min, because of her, we finished it an 1 hr and 30 minutes. All she did was complain how tired she was, and why are we running. And I’ll indid was hell at her and tell her to ****ing shut up and keep rucking.

Fast forward at 0900 first call, I get called into 1SG office to explain why I was picking on her.

I like i said, didn’t really get in trouble, but a woman can destroy your career pretty quickly. Plus it’s a double standard, because if a guy were to complain, he would be the one being talk too because it’s what he signed up for.

You sure showed her, didn't ya.

Originally posted by Robtard
You sure showed her, didn't ya.

The problem with these sorts of physicals standards is that they are often not based on the physical requirements of the role, but on an arbitrary physical standard that was set at a time when only men held those roles.

Most women are not going to meet the same upper-body strength feats as most men, but most men are not going to meet the same lower-body strength feats as most women. Women are effectively being penalized for not meeting a standard that was modeled after men, and not the physical requirements for the role.

But hey, it allows people like SquallX to be a hard-ass and justify why women should not be in combat roles, even though there is no relationship between the number of push-ups one can do before exertion and their ability to pull a ****ing trigger.

Misogynist are a funny lot.

Forget where I read it, but a lot of male soldiers have second thoughts over shooting a woman opposed to a man, not saying they won't, but they may hesitate for a moment. That's something you want on your side when it comes to combat, enemy soldiers hesitating, even for a moment.

Originally posted by Adam_PoE
The problem with these sorts of physicals standards is that they are often not based on the physical requirements of the role, but on an arbitrary physical standard that was set at a time when only men held those roles.

Most women are not going to meet the same upper-body strength feats as most men, but most men are not going to meet the same lower-body strength feats as most women. Women are effectively being penalized for not meeting a standard that was modeled after men, and not the physical requirements for the role.

Your statement is patently false. Most women cannot meet the same lower body strength feats as men either.

It has absolutely nothing to do with when the requirements were set and it has more to do with biology then desire.

Women shouldn't be allowed in combat roles, after all, they can't pilot drones as well as men.

Originally posted by Adam_PoE
The problem with these sorts of physicals standards is that they are often not based on the physical requirements of the role, but on an arbitrary physical standard that was set at a time when only men held those roles.

Most women are not going to meet the same upper-body strength feats as most men, but most men are not going to meet the same lower-body strength feats as most women. Women are effectively being penalized for not meeting a standard that was modeled after men, and not the physical requirements for the role.

But hey, it allows people like SquallX to be a hard-ass and justify why women should not be in combat roles, even though there is no relationship between the number of push-ups one can do before exertion and their ability to pull a ****ing trigger.

This reads like typical SJW apologetics (for the weird excuses SJWs come up with for lowering standards so women can get into physically demanding roles that they conventionally could not) about Firemen and the physical tests they have to pass. Like...ascending a ladder with 70lbs of fire-hose? You know...an actual legit situation and scenario that really will happen in the line of work.

What about hiking 50+ miles with a 70lbs ruck (it starts out that heavy but gets lighter as you consume your rations and water) in the middle of a mission? You know, actual combat scenarios that these tests are intended to address. At any given moment, there are probably 100s of servicemen (and maybe even a few servicewomen) in these exact scenarios, on real missions. But you'd like to pretend Squall's just full of crap and the training is useless, right?

Worked out with a lady who was in her 40s but was still able to pass the fireman tests. She was awesome. Muscular, but not too muscular like a steroided bodybuilder. And she passed those tests every 2 years just like everyone else. Don't you think positions like yours are sexist? You wish to diminish the hard work and efforts women like her put in to meet real-world standards. You look down on women and think they need to be coddled because they just can't do things as well as men. So you want to look down on the hard working women out there who do meet those standards. That's sad and sexist. 🙁

Originally posted by Adam_PoE
The problem with these sorts of physicals standards is that they are often not based on the physical requirements of the role, but on an arbitrary physical standard that was set at a time when only men held those roles.

Most women are not going to meet the same upper-body strength feats as most men, but most men are not going to meet the same lower-body strength feats as most women. Women are effectively being penalized for not meeting a standard that was modeled after men, and not the physical requirements for the role.

But hey, it allows people like SquallX to be a hard-ass and justify why women should not be in combat roles, even though there is no relationship between the number of push-ups one can do before exertion and their ability to pull a ****ing trigger.

F*ck that dumb shit you just spewed, do the same shit a man can or make a f*cking sandwich. Period.

Originally posted by snowdragon
Your statement is patently false. Most women cannot meet the same lower body strength feats as men either.

It has absolutely nothing to do with when the requirements were set and it has more to do with biology then desire.

That gap increases when men and women complete equal kinds of training. Meaning, the men get stronger, faster, compared to women. It's rather unfair, biologically.

Originally posted by dadudemon
...they just can't do things as well as men.

Careful, your sexism is showing.

Implying that pulling a trigger is all there is to combat shows an amazing amount of ignorance.

Originally posted by Silent Master
Implying that pulling a trigger is all there is to combat shows an amazing amount of ignorance.

Remember: this is the same person who says if you aren't a rapist being publicly accused of being a rapist shouldn't bother you.

True, fragging your CO because he saw you raping a local village child requires a whole other set of skills.