This "battle of the sexes" is apparently no contest
American writer Todd Gallagher's recently published book, Andy Roddick Beat Me With A Frying Pan, answers the kind of sports questions that you might talk about over a cold beverage, questions such as "Could a morbidly obese goalie shut out an NHL team?" or "Would sumo wrestlers make good NFL linemen?". Mr. Gallagher and his team of helpers conducted experiments that tried to answer such questions, and he amusingly documents the results in his book.
One of Mr. Gallagher's questions, however, is quite politically incorrect to ask. It does, however, point to some reasons why Canada's national women's hockey team may never play as well as our national men's hockey team, a question that I suspect that even Don Cherry might be afraid to touch.
One of the questions explored in the book is "How big is the gap between male and female athletes?" Mr. Gallagher argues that a top-level male athlete and a top level female athlete are definitely better than the couch-potato of either sex. Certainly there are lots of valid reasons to admire female athletes.
That said, he argues that there is anecdotal and statistical evidence that the gap in performance between male and female athletes may not be due to "sexism". Efforts to allay sexual discrimination in sports may never totally eliminate this difference.
"The truth of the matter is that the gap between pro female athletes and their male counterparts is wider than the general public understands and considerably more severe than the sports media has ever presented. Not surprisingly, the gap is largest in sports where size, strength and speed are essential. Somewhat more surprisingly, there's also a significant gap separating men and women in the games that are almost exclusively skill based."
He then goes on to develop his argument for most of the chapter. He then finds an example that may be of particular interest to Shotgun readers.
He notes that the U.S. women's hockey team has played boy's high school teams, in games where checking was not allowed, and lost. He then adds:
"These outcomes aren't aberrations; the women's Canadian national team, which won the Olympic gold medal in 2006, regularly plays and loses to Midget AAA men's teams (sixteen to eighteen year olds)."
I wonder if Canadian sports reporters ever take notice of this. I doubt it. I also doubt that any reporters who may have covered these games asked "Why can't championship-level female hockey players defeat younger male hockey players who should be less skilled than they are?"
I doubt that even Don Cherry is that brave.
"Think of this training as a fun adventure instead of as a chore. Quit dreaming about how much better your life would be once you became socially competent and start training right now." - MrCareBear
How can a female officer be expected to do the EXACT same job as a male officer when she can't even fulfill the same physical requirements:
she is allowed extra time on the running portion
she is required to do fewer pullups to pass
she is allowed to do pushups from her knees
she is allowed to pass with a weaker grip on the grip test
Personally...if I was involved in a life or death situation, I would want the officer who responds to save my life to be the one that didn't need an extra 5 minutes to finish the mile and 1/2 run. I just find that promoting and advertising lower standards for the female physical test and allowing them isn't the best practice. If a guy can't measure up then he does not get hired, even if he were to fall just below being accepted. Yet the female who falls within the same range as the unacceptable male ends up getting the job.
Question: If you're going to do the same job, then why not have the same standards?
The World's Strongest Woman Jill Mills vs. Average Men
Here's the delusional bullshit chick version of being a cop, complete with makeup and background music for when she's taking down that 280lbs. perp: :giggle:
Can women handle the fireman job equally, as well, or better than men ?? The answer is in the qualification testing. Women have easier physical agility testing requirements than the guys do. Why is that ? Because the Civil Service Commissions know that the women can't pass the same test the men take. Feminism even slants the playing field in favor of women by lowering physical standards for them. But in the heat of the battle when a victim needs help there is nothing to slant the situation in favor of a woman who can not do the job due to lack of strength.
On top of that, there is the issue of pulling out one of your fellow firefighters that goes down in a burning building. As a 10 + year veteran of the fire service serving as a paramedic, firefighter, and arson investigator, my expert opinion is that women do not handle the job as well as men based on physical capability. I have seen delayed fire suppression and delayed rescue efforts due to limitations on the girl's part. The fire ground is no place for that.
Trade places with the victim, and ask yourself if you want to spend that extra 60 seconds in a burning building waiting for rescue (Hold you breath for 60 seconds or 45 or 30. compound that by breathing in heavy smoke when you breathe). Or be the victim watching outside as your home burns (Fire doubles its square every 60 seconds i.e.: 4 inches of fire is 32 inches of fire 60 seconds later in the free burning stage). Could you take this job in good conscience knowing you may cause a larger scale of destruction or cost someone their life ?? It's a shame that women are too selfish and childish to realize all the lives the put at risk by their thoughtless actions. There are many factors contributing to casualty and loss of property. Poor response due to female incompetence shouldn't be one of them.
Fitness standards in the military should be the same regardless of sex. If women want the equality to serve in a combat role then they should be held to the same standard as their male counterparts. That would be true equality.
I serve in the Royal Navy, and am constantly annoyed at how physically useless my female colleagues are. Their easier fitness tests mean there is no chance of them failing, unless they are grossly unfit, and it is common knowledge that they have these easy tests so the whole Navy doesn't look foolish for allowing them on ships.
I was an officer for 5 years back in the 80s before I got into federal non-sworn stuff and our physical requirements for women were much easier than for men. I asked the Academy Commander about it and he said that if they made the requirements the same they either would have no female officers, as they can't pass the male requirements, or they would have to lower the requirements to the current female standards and then about any male could pass them. This is sort of what many of the Nevada depts have done when they went to single requirements. To get into many Nevada depts you only have to do:Candidates must complete the vertical jump at a distance of at least 14 inches. Candidates will have one (1) minute to complete 15 sit-ups.
Candidates need to complete a minimum of 18 push-ups. The candidate must complete the 1.5 mile run/walk in 17 minutes and 17 seconds, or less. I moved to Las Vegas last year for my job and I took that test for a reserve officer slot I was interested in. (And moved back to Virginia this year, for my job) I am 42 and breezed through it. There were many candidates there taking it for fulltime positions and I only saw one person fail, she could not do the 14" vertical jump. So, if you are going to make it that easy, why even bother?
It always bugged me when I was in the Army too, since the Army physical requirements are also different for the sexes. But the female soldiers are getting paid the same as the men and want to be treated the same, so why are their reqs so much easier? And while we are at it, why aren't women required to register for Selective Service when they become 18?
Why Are Women More Prone Than Men to ACL Injuries?
An increasing number of female athletes are tearing their anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) during sports participation. Most of these tears are caused by noncontact injuries in sports, such as basketball, soccer, gymnastics, and cheerleading, in the United States. In Europe, participation in snow skiing and team handball results in up to eight times more ACL injuries in women than in men.
What is the ACL?
The ACL is located in the center of the knee joint and connects the femur (thigh bone) and the tibia (shin bone). Its primary purpose is to provide stability to the knee. It prevents the tibia from moving too far forward and from rotating too far inward under the femur.
How does the injury happen?
There are several ways noncontact ACL injuries occur, including stopping quickly, cutting sharply, and landing and changing direction with both feet planted. Most commonly in court sports, such as basketball, a pop is felt. This pop also refers to the way the athlete lands with both feet planted and out of control and feels a pop. It usually signals that the ACL is torn completely.
As mentioned, in Europe more female than male skiers injure their ACL. The mechanism of injury in skiers is different than in court sport participants. When skiers injure the ACL, they are moving out of control with the knee bent or extended. The uphill arm is back, the body is off balance, the hips are lower than the knees, and the weight is placed on the inside edge of the downhill ski. Dr. Robert Johnson describes this mechanism of injury as the phantom foot ACL.
A knee joint with a torn ACL is abnormally loose, or lax. Because of this severe laxity, the female athlete is actually at greater risk for her knee giving way or pivoting without warning. The risk of other serious, and possibly irrepairable, knee damage also increases.
Naturally, women are built differently than men. These differences are evident when examining the muscles and bones of their hips and legs. Compared with men (Fig. 2), women have a wider pelvis (Fig. 3); their hips are more flexible and have more rotation; their femur is tilted forward more at the top and is angled more toward the knee; their lower leg is turned inward and angled more toward the knee, but there are forces pushing outward; they have less developed thigh muscles, making the knee more dependent on the ligaments for stability; they have increased flexibility and hyperextension in their joints; and they have a narrower notch in the femur where their smaller anterior cruciate ligament is attached.
Why do these anatomic differences cause women to be more prone than men to ACL injuries? Because the thigh muscles are lax, the ACL must serve as the main stabilizer of the knee. However, the small ACL often cannot handle the forces put on it during sports participation, so it tears. Other contributing factors are associated with the sport and with the physical make-up of a woman. Her position, coordination, skill, talent, and coaching affect the way the female athlete uses her body and can affect whether she is at increased risk for ACL injury. A poorly conditioned or overweight body puts more pressure on the knee joint and puts the athlete at greater risk for ACL injury. Hormonal levels at certain times during the menstrual cycle and extremely low percentage body fat cause the ACL to be more lax and, therefore, at increased risk for injury.
Upon returning to competition after ACL reconstruction, a University of Tennessee female basketball player stated that she would do anything to win a national championship including tearing her ACL. Not too bright.
Any mother will tell you that if men had to go through the excruciating pain of childbirth the human race would have become extinct long ago.
According to feminine lore, guys simply don't handle pain well. The tiniest twinge of discomfort is enough to reduce most men into helpless, whimpering heaps. Women, on the other hand, can handle the tough stuff. In fact, you can ratchet up the old pain-o-meter to agony and beyond and most women will soldier on without flinching.
The trouble with that theory is -- it's wrong. And now men have the science to prove it.
"The laboratory research seems to indicate that for many kinds -- but not all kinds -- of stimuli, women have a lower tolerance for pain," says Linda LeResche, ScD, a professor of oral medicine at the University of Washington, in Seattle.
But what exactly that means is a puzzle LeResche and other pain researchers across the country are trying to work through. The fact is, no one really knows for sure if women and men perceive pain differently, let alone how they react to it.
Feeling Your Pain
Laboratory studies show a clear difference in pain tolerance levels between men and women. When healthy men and women are subjected to heat and other types of pain tests, women almost always report feeling discomfort first.
"It takes a lower temperature for a women to tell you that this feels painful," says Roger Fillingim, PhD, associate professor in the college of dentistry at the University of Florida, in Gainesville. "The laboratory studies show rather convincingly that women have a lower pain threshold and pain tolerance than men. That has been fairly consistently shown in the experimental studies that have been done."
To measure the differences in pain tolerance between men and women, Fillingim uses something called effect size, which compares the differences between the groups to the differences within each group. On a scale of small, moderate, and large, the pain tolerance difference between men and women is considered moderate. In degrees centigrade that translates to a difference of one degree to a degree and a half.
"So they are not so great that you would say, 'Here comes a women and she will have more pain no matter what else is going on,'" he says. "It is also not so small that they should be ignored for other factors."
Those findings actually prompt as many questions as they answer. For instance, researchers want to know, what role does a woman's menstrual cycle play in her perception of pain? It must play some part, says Sherry Marts, scientific director for the Society for Women's Health Research in Washington, D.C. For example, she says, women know not to get their legs waxed right before their period because it is much more painful than at other times in their cycle.
"Something in the hormonal factor is affecting the perception of the pain," says Marts.
Fillingim agrees, adding that laboratory research suggests that during the premenstrual phase women are more sensitive to most types of painful stimuli than during other phases of their cycle.
"So there are a lot of complicated interactions among different systems of the body rather than just estrogen going up and down," he says.
For 30 years it has been used to test the fitness of officers who police riots and other outbreaks of serious public disorder.
The so-called 'shield run' involves officers covering a distance of 500 metres in less than two minutes, 45 seconds while wearing full riot gear and carrying a shield.
But when Inspector Diane Bamber, 51, failed to meet the time limit, she claimed she had been left humiliated.
She brought a sex and age discrimination case against her force, Greater Manchester Police, and now stands to win up to £30,000 after an employment tribunal ruled in her favour.
Officers have to be able to run a distance of 500 metres in two minutes, 45 seconds in full riot gear
The landmark case has opened the door for thousands of other women officers to claim payouts and has triggered a review of specialist police training across the country.
Insp Bamber, a serving officer for more than 30 years who still works for Greater Manchester Police, attended an Initial Public Order Commanders' Course in Lancashire in November 2008.
She complained to the tribunal that prior to the course starting she had been led to believe that she would not have to take part in the shield run. But on the day of the test, Insp Bamber was informed that all officers who wanted to be considered for events where trouble was a possibility would have to pass it.
She agreed to run but she did not finish in the allotted time. Her failure meant she could not complete the rest of the training course.
When Insp Bamber applied to retake the shield run, it is alleged that one of her colleagues remarked: 'She's got no f****** chance.'
In fact she did pass at the second attempt several months later – after Greater Manchester Police made it easier by raising the time limit to three minutes.
The tribunal heard that on the second occasion, Insp Bamber gave herself the equivalent of an extra 20 seconds by starting at the front of the group. Previously, she had started at the back but the clock starts when the first person sets off.
In her ruling, Judge Hilary Slater said Insp Bamber's claims of indirect sex and age discrimination were 'well-founded'.
Noting that the officer had 'suffered humiliation at being sent away from the course', Judge Slater added: 'The tribunal concludes that the claimant was put at the disadvantage suffered by women and persons of her age group in that she failed the test and was not able to complete the training.'
The shield run was first introduced in the Eighties when Scotland Yard used it to test the fitness of officers policing the Notting Hill Carnival. Greater Manchester Police also conducted the runs for 30 years but has now dropped them.
The Mail on Sunday understands that the Association of Chief Police Officers is now reviewing the lawfulness of the physical training formats for 13 specialist operational roles, including those for firearms officers, which could discriminate against women and older officers.
Last night Tory MP Robert Halfon said: 'At a time when forces face enormous challenges and need to do all they can to protect frontline service, it is bizarre they are being forced to use taxpayers' money to pay compensation in cases such as these.'
The level of compensation will be set later this month.
This is like fake news, but it's actually true! I always wondered how dumb lawsuits made it to light in the first place, but then I forgot about female judges. This is a recipe for disaster female officers topped with female judges, they sure make comic news, but when the laughs are over, their sheer idiocy makes you wanna kick all these retards out of power.
Women shouldn't be allowed to be police officers, firefighters or soldiers! This shit pisses me off. Even if I join the army national guard, I can't escape feminism! One day, after our society fully collapses, the men of the future will look at our era and wonder "what the fuck were they thinking"!
Absolutely correct. Feminism really is the McDonalds in a junk food diet of political ideologies. It flies because it's easy, it's easy to assume that equality means the geneders are freely interchangable without consequence. Funny thing about facts, they don't go away when you choose to ignore them. All the talking and pontificating in the world won't change the fact that females aren't built the same as males. I've never devoted much thought to this but now I really don't like the idea of a female fire fighter.
Since 2003 the SRSA has trained 880 firefighters on the program protection against accidents, SMO. Of them, one hundred were women. A follow-up have shown that 30-50 percent of the female students could not handle the physical aspects of employment tests for emergency services."
The background is that the Swedish gender hysteria has driven a situation where the physical demands on firefighters lowered to make it easier for women to become firefighters."
Comment by Ulf:
We can soon expect the first death tolls caused by gender quota: Female Firefighters that can´t save a victim in a burning building/house/apartment/office etc because they don´t have the physical strength (not meeting the standards of the physical requirement) to pull the victim away from the fire and the toxic smoke. Politically indoctrinated politicians and public calling for gender quota in every area of the society will be painfully aware of their stupidity.
Our goal isn't just to educate men like you, but to train you as well! We want you to do more than just stand up against systematic feminist brainwashing. We want you to have a GOOD LIFE! Teaching you how to put a bitch in check isn't just for petty revenge. It's so you can have a great relationship with her!
Our goal is to make you comfortable in your own skin so both men and women will want to be part of your life. In other words, we're not just here to expose a problem with society. We're really here to teach you how to re-invent society, so you'll actually enjoy talking to people instead of avoiding them!