Baba Yaga and Diedre Part ii?

Question

Here are the military standards for men and women:

http://usmilitary.about.com/library/milinfo/blmarinefitness.htm

Again, easier standards for men and women. Women don't even have to do pull-ups to qualify. why? Because most cannnot do them, and there would be almost no women able to qualify if they had to meet the same requirements as men. But hey, we need to have the same number of men and women in the military. I mean if its the choice of young men dying in combat b/c they are paired with physically inferior women, or the choice of being politically correct, well then we have to be politically correct.

Please respond to these FACTS. Another example of men being discriminated against so radicals like Baba Yaga are apeased.

When will this stop? When will these people recognize biological differences b/w men and women, and stop regurciating social construct nonsense.

Answer 1

The name is Deirdre. Funny how a "supposed", Policeperson/Cook Country Clerk, can constantly post such inaccuracies. I think that it is probably par for the course with the other factoids you post. Example http://ca.answers.yahoo.com/question/index;_ylt=AjIj7dNZMliyJNloRtpWvRnBFQx.?qid=20070316185711AAbhgRh
These are not lower standards but Substantive Equality. It was proven at West Point that females could scale a wall not by pulling themselves up and using their arms but by lower body strengh which is equal to or greater than that of males.
Now since you claim to be a Cook's Country Clerk and a Chicago Policeperson you may be interested in what the law has to say with regards to this inquiry.
Now, the courts and many equality seekers have a broader view of equality, one that is often called "substantive equality". A substantive equality approach recognizes that patterns of disadvantage and oppression exist in society and requires that law makers and government officials take this into account in their actions. It examines the impact of law within its surrounding social context to make sure that laws and policies promote full participation in society by everyone, regardless of personal characteristics or group membership. Substantive equality requires challenging common stereotypes about group characteristics that may underlie law or government action as well as ensuring that important differences in life experience, as viewed by the equality seeker, are taken into account. The Supreme Court of Canada recently affirmed its commitment to a substantive approach to equality in its unanimous decision in Law v. Canada.
Dimorphically men are generally larger then women. However there are a lot of puny little men out there who couldn't fight there way out of a wet paper bag. I would sooner a strong, courageous, agile, fast. trained women to be on my side if a battle ensues then some little wimp.
Although the courts do not always say it this way, many equality seekers prefer to think that the difference is due to your membership in a group that is identified by personal characteristics. This way of thinking helps to show that the definition of "difference" comes from one person's or group's point of view, when thinking about other people in comparison to themselves. In other words, the "personal characteristics" that the courts consider are labels created to talk about what people believe are important differences between individuals and groups.
As for trashing another person such as Baba Yaga, none of you have come close to winning a single argument with her though your pathetic attempts were a good try. I for one like and respect her and I know many others do as well. Someday if you study hard and eat all your green vegetables you may actually get past round one with this woman in a debate. That also goes for Mr Q, Tanks, Michael, Happy Bullet, Alexandra, Diverse and the rest of the gang who attempts to denigrate and abuse feminists and women at the same time.

Answer 2

I am about to become sooooo unpopular and Oh man I hate to say I mostly agree. I feel that women should be able to pass the same physical requirements as a man. Especially in securtity fields where physical aptitude IS important.

I worked as a correctional officer in a men's maximum security prison, I hated working with nearly all the other women (not all). I am physically very strong, but still not as physically strong as most men are (not all). However, what I lacked in physical strength I was able to make up for in training, the same as a small man would. And speaking from experience there were very, very few other women I worked with that I would trust to guard my back. (I wanted to return home to my husband and kids in the same condition as when I left for work.) Sadly, many women have the attitude that they can do anything any man can do, and to say otherwise is sexist. No, my sisters it's basic physiology. A man equal to my height and weight (unless he's got some kind of degenerative disease) is going to have more muscle mass than me. Fact.

No woman out there would want or allow you to give her a written test with easier answers to compensate for lack of knowledge, so how could you justify, and why would you try to justify giving her easier physical requirements?

Answer 3

Why is this question called Baba Yaga and Diedre Part 2 did I miss the first part and what does this have to do with these stupid facts. These standards are ones that men made up to begin with to keep women out so they are not even fair. This is nuts.

Answer 4

I would not want to do heavy labor of any kind.
The hardest work that I ever did was cleaning rehabilitated apartments in the Houston, TX summer heat. I moved stoves and fridges and cleaned and carried heavy items. It was ghastly, but I did it. I was glad of the money at the time, too.
That said, I never wanted to work on the roadside, railroads, in construction, join the military, etc. I simply wouldn't be happy with that level of physicality.
I know women, then and now, who can and want to do very physical work. If they can do so, why not offer it to them?
Everyone is different, and we no longer disparage men who choose not to join the military as weak. Are women who want to work in a non-traditional field to be disallowed when they have the capability to do so?
All jobs should be available to all job seekers who are QUALIFIED to do the job.
Good luck

Answer 5

I gave numerous examples of the Troll Baba Yag's vicious and sarcastic answers (In her own words) towards Yahoo's Answers Members.
The question was reported as abuse probably by the troll her self. (Troll) is one of Baba Yag's own slur-es used against the members. And, the question was pulled..

I was accused of being not able to take it. TAKE WHAT?

Cassius, Tanks, Robinson, Yawls assumptions, I mean truths, are pretty plain and right on the money.

Quote from Robinson:
"Notice how Abba Yoga didn't respond? This is how the feminists act when they know they've been shut down."

This is so true. Most Feminist do not really answer the question at all.

They dissect the question or claim it is sexist or proceed with some obtuse drivel and accusations that was not the intent or does not apply to the question at all.

And then they proceed to name calling and labeling.That's Feminist do, which they claim they don't do, but, if they don't, why are they doing it???

Some times the Feminist's are souly animalistic to the inth degree.

Answer 6

Notice how Baba Yaga didn't respond? This is how the feminists act when they know they've been shut down. Dierdre comes back with a lie, which is always nice to have around for the feminists, I suppose; it might make them feel better about themselves.

Remember this, Baba Yaga and Dierdre, when you speak of how invincible you believe your arguments to be. I would also note that "gender similarities hypothesis" I shut Baba Yaga down in, but that topic is gone, so I can't add it. I'm sure there will be dozens to come, though.

Answer 7

yeah gender is not a social construct, like race. It is founded in very real biological facts, men and women are different, not to say one is superior or inferior, but there are differences. You need someone to tell you that?

Answer 8

I recognize the differences and I am a biologist. I have gone many rounds with the " social constructionists " here, but were you not a Policeman from Chicago last night?

Answer 9

You are right. Now the question is, will they accept they are wrong or not? Doubtful.

Sigh... why must I always be the one to educate?

Deidre, the average male has 30-35% more lower body strength than a female.(when not working out. When working out, difference is grossely multiplied)

Squat world record:
Men: 1074 lbs
Women: 507 lbs

Answer 10

"HAHA!!! You are just pissed because I caught you in a huge lie last night!
http://ca.answers.yahoo.com/question/ind...

So what's your schtick today? Cop or attorney? Jet fighter pilot? Professional athlete? Surgeon?"

And I've proven that your pursuit of "empirical evidence" is by definition, completely baseless; moreover, one persons observation means jack unless it is support by many, many others.

"These are not lower standards but Substantive Equality"

Just like we can have women make 75% of what men make, right? Its just Substantive Equality. If a man never needs to take maturnity leave, there is no reason for him to be paid in the same bracket as women.

"It was proven at West Point that females could scale a wall not by pulling themselves up and using their arms but by lower body strengh which is equal to or greater than that of males"

I find this questionable, seeing as the male physiology tends to have an extra muscle in the lower half of their bodies that makes lower body extertions easier for us.

"Dimorphically men are generally larger then women. However there are a lot of puny little men out there who couldn't fight there way out of a wet paper bag."

Exactly so, if there are men who are smaller than women, than your substantive equality should favour them as much as a small woman. This is however not the case. Weak men make poor soldiers, however, weak women do not? Its nonsensical.

"As for trashing another person such as Baba Yaga, none of you have come close to winning a single argument with her though your pathetic attempts were a good try."

She flames legitimate questions with name calling and pathetic pleas for empirical evidence to back up philosphical statements. ie: "Do you like the colour blue?" "OMG, SHOW ME PROOF CRANK, BLUE IS THE OPPRESSOR OF THE WOMEN.", etc.

Answer 11

PRECISELY Deirdre, straight equality is so limiting and gets in the way of, you know.. equality. Now SUBSTANTIVE equality. That's better. We're not as strong? Hey, we were discriminated against, equal pay for us. Not as smart? Again, equal pay. Way too lazy to produce any results whatsoever. Hand over the equality in pay. Hell, can't even do that job - In the1960s there was no such thing as rape in marriage for crying out loud! GIMME THE PAY!

Based on this excellent post Dierdre I find myself wondering if these people understand that substantive equality applies just as well to "winning of arguments". Yeah sure our arguments are inane, often vapid and baseless ramblings which rarely make sense, but ya know?! Look at the CONTEXT.. we are poor oppressed wimmins. Just by turning up we are equal, by stringing a sentence together, regardless of it's coherence, that's WINNING!!

Substantive equality - it's superiority in a thinly veiled wrapper of equality, justified by a victim mentality. Sums up feminist thought nicely :) :)