Women, Affirmative Action, Law Enforcement

I had a conversation once with a female firefighter wannabee . She was overjoyed that the next 3 appointments were to be female in the area she was applying to . I told her that it was unfair to other firefighters . She was rather upset . I explained that when a 180 pound firefighter was hanging onto a roof that had just collapsed under his feet his chances of being pulled up to safety by another 180 pound + male were a lot better than with her 135 pound frame . I challanged her to lift me up (170 pounds) onto a concrete table there in the courtyard . Even with the strength summoned by her anger she could not . Her reply before turning on her heel was "Well , they HAVE to hire me !!
 
Agencies simply need to have better requirements based upon a specific job.

i.e. physical requirements for a SWAT team will be different than a patrol officer, or a detective, or a meter maid.

In the Georgia case, it was wrong to have an older, non-able body guarding a dangerious criminal.
 
Charley, statistically, you are incorrect. Us white male types make more money, for the same job, as any of our counterparts, nationwide. When simple stats like that die, then we might be closer to what you describe.


Paratrooper,
Consider the logic of demanding that a 135 lbs. person has to lift the 180 lbs. male, just because he was hired first. I'm sure the 180 lbs. male has similar trouble with the 225 lbs. firefighters.

And I'm sure you already considered that the 135 lbs. female might save the day dragging a hose through a duct the 180 lbs. guy couldn't fit through. :rolleyes:


I recently read an article in a military publication about a group of Army females that were put in with male infantry in Iraq to conduct searches of female Iraqis. Of interest, one woman is the BEST SAW gunner in her battalion. But I'm sure someone else can do more pushups.
 
I explained that when a 180 pound firefighter was hanging onto a roof that had just collapsed under his feet his chances of being pulled up to safety by another 180 pound + male were a lot better than with her 135 pound frame .
Click to expand...
Just thinking. If he had only weighed 130 instead of 180...maybe the roof would never have collapsed in the first place?
Just kidding. Kind of. Couldn't the 130 pounder (man or woman) argue that there might be a situation where their weight and/or smaller frame would be an advantage? Say, a small child at the end of broken beam that may not support much weight? Or a puppy at the end of a narrow, smoke filled tunnel?
 
Stigma attached by affirmative action hiring

The problem with affirmative action hiring is that it sometimes stigmatizes those it is supposed to help. How often have you heard someone say "he/she only was hired because of his/her race/gender"? The person may have been the best applicant for the job, but because of affirmative action hiring he/she does not get the respect they deserve for qualifing for the job. This is unfair to that person. If that was the reason they were hired, then the life of everyone who depends on that person to do their job is put in jeopardy. Would you really want a brain surgeon working on you that was hired because of affirmative action? :eek: :eek: :eek:
 
Affirmative action evens the scales NOW, so down the road we can go back to hiring strictly on ability.
Click to expand...

Guess what? Civil service hiring and promotions have NEVER been based strictly on ability. They would like to keep the thin veneer of legitimacy in place, but it's always been just that....a facade....Since before the civil service reforms of the 1920's up to the present day.
 
Charley, statistically, you are incorrect. Us white male types make more money, for the same job, as any of our counterparts, nationwide. When simple stats like that die, then we might be closer to what you describe.
Click to expand...

Insisting that women are hired to meet a quota will not solve the separate issue of making sure they are paid equal to their male counterparts.

Regardless of the statistics, tipping the scales away from "equal" treatment, even if it is to try and "correct" past inequalities...does not serve women, minorities or the companies themselves. By its very nature, it allows people to be hired to do a job that they are not qualified for or that others are more qualified for. That is just not good math to me.

Also, I hate to say it, but it has allowed some of us to accept a "you owe me" mentality. Like the female that paratrooper mentioned. I am not saying that she did not have a case...I agree with you that her weight should not be the only factor in determining her capacity as a firefighter. But her attitude, according to Paratrooper, was that "they have to hire me." I don't know her enough to judge, but I admit I have known women with that attitude.

Equal qualifications. And yes, equal pay for the same job. That we should insist on. We should raise our children to insist on that. We should insist on equal opportunities within the educational system. But telling little Sally that she should get a job because she is female or black is no different that our grandfathers telling little Johnny that he should get the job because he is male and white.
 
Captainsdad2...
Good point. I have known women who were hired on their abilities that have had to deal with just that sort of thing. The "behind the back" assumption that they were only hired because of affirmative action. The emotional equivilant of winning a contest and having to hear that the whole thing was "rigged".
 
Handy, Handy.........ever the one to disagree with me. :rolleyes:

You say this topic is disgusting. I totally agree. It IS disgusting that someone less qualified for a job has a leg up before even being evaluated just because they are a certain gender or race. We agree that the topic of Affirmative Action is disgusting! :D A historic day.....
 
I didn't say the topic is disgusting. I said a bunch of people who realistically are unaffected by it shouldn't spend so much time grousing.

Anyone here know someone who can't get a good job due to Affirmative Action? All the good jobs for white males all gone? :rolleyes:


Right.
 
I say in a private business, the owners should be able to hire whomever they choose, for whatever reason they choose. Their money, their decision. I don't care if they will only hire German woman priests between 35 and 40 who dislike homosexuals. Their choice.

In government jobs, anyone qualified for the position should be considered and offered the same pay. Doesn't matter if they are white, black, man, woman, athesist, Buddhist, Mexican, Scandanavian, drop-dead gorgeous, smelly enough that you wouldn't approach within 20' of them, whether they be 20 or 80. The only discrimination should be for what actually matters to the job.

So if the job requires lifting 80 pound boxes all day, and the small lady can't do it, I feel no sorrow for her. If the job requires putting your hands in small places, and the 400 pound guy with gorilla hands can't do it, too bad. If running 2 miles in 15 minuets is a requirement, it better be the same for the men and women. If a young woman or an old man can't do it, see you after you go work out.
 
Anyone here know someone who can't get a good job due to Affirmative Action? All the good jobs for white males all gone?
Click to expand...

I know plenty of people who were unable to get hired or promoted because of affirmative action, and also some that were unable to get hired or promoted because they weren't "one of the boys".
 
rarely do those "stats" break out what the "same job" is actually.

they usually fail to compensate for plenty of factors: such as additional benefits such as maternity leave, length of experience and qualifications, liability, etc.
 
FrankDrebin
Apparently, according to the other guy in the other thread you started, in GA, you don't have to fight anyone, you can just shoot them. So why should physical size play any part at all in hiring?
Click to expand...
Like the gal who had her gun snatched by a prisoner recently?

There is no doubt that some woman can really handle themselves, and that some men can not. But on the average, women are not compatible with such work - and mixed in with males in a stressful and dangerous environment it creates other potential problems as well.

I think physically capable women have a role in handling female prisoners - searching and transporting, etc. But solo lady cops, which I see a great deal these days, are a bad idea IMO.
 
Like the gal who had her gun snatched by a prisoner recently?
Click to expand...

I bet there are more men who get killed with their own guns on the job than women.....Regardless of that, should we raise the standard so only giant men can get hired?
 
Aside from the very few front page incidents, if there was a real problem with women cops being constantly overpowered and killed, wouldn't there be some data to support that view?
 
In some cases a certain overt physical ability could be of value, either in extreme necessity or as a psychological intimidation.
However, as noted already, sometimes the people who are better at observation, negotiation or tactical thinking...would be of more value as public servents than those who just have the adrenaline and the bulk.
And actually, when I worked for the system (albeit in the '80s), there were quite a few women LEO's who I respected for their ability to deescalate a situation rather than have it get out of hand.
Additionally, because of the increased militarization of LE, there has been a tendancy for some PD's to hire people more on the main basis of physical presence. Some PD's have done that here, and it's been bad for public safety...insofar as these type of LEO's might be good for busting drunks...but are very poor for either preventing crime, or handling evidence after one.
Additionally, overt machismo, is a good way to enrage/irritate/vex the public.
Gods know I tire of contact with these type of officers...and even being sympathetic (sometimes) to their jobs...the attitudes are exasperating. And anyway, given all the talk about needing physical strength and all...might remember that it only takes one smart felon/adversary to find a blind spot...and the fights likely over. To end this lovely sex/gender debate...in the barrio...I knew 15-16 year old girls who could easily gut, string, shred and skin most of the posturing macho's who have too oft been hired as LEO's out here in the hinterlands.
 
FrankDrebin
I bet there are more men who get killed with their own guns on the job than women.....Regardless of that, should we raise the standard so only giant men can get hired?
Click to expand...
Perhaps because there are still less women overall.

Aside from the very few front page incidents, if there was a real problem with women cops being constantly overpowered and killed, wouldn't there be some data to support that view?
Click to expand...
Good question; and it begs the question, is it expedient to the current political trends to compile and disseminate that data? I have (or had) an interesting book about the inordinate number of Navy jet fighter crashes involving women pilots; and the maneuverings to avoid admitting that Tailhook wasn't the Navy's only problem involving females. Seems the truth doesn't quite match what everyone is told to believe that women are just as capable as men in all things not involving physical strength.

One could compare other areas in this regard. While there have been some very good lady race car and motorcycle riders, they are a distinct minority. Not just because there are fewer women in those sports, but on a per capita basis the "top 100" women are no match for the "top 100" men.
 
Perhaps because there are still less women overall.
Click to expand...

Most likely, but does that mean we should raise the standard for men to keep this from happening as much? And why is it that you don't hear people calling for this when a man is shot with his own gun?
 
Most "gun" crimes are committed by men, so does that mean only women should be allowed to carry CCW? :) After all, you guys are so big and strong...don't really need the pee-shooters, now do ya?
Just kidding, of course, but if we are going to judge all female officers on the facacies of one...
I just don't see it as that complicated. Some men and some women are not suited to be LEO, either because of physical limitations, or mental, or communicative, or inability to manage stress, or inability to work well with others, ect. Other men and women succeed as LEO.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top