sunstoned Posted January 23, 2020 Share Posted January 23, 2020 37 minutes ago, Kenngo1969 said: I'm not saying that BYU, along with other religiously-oriented schools, will give up broader athletic competition opportunities of its own accord, I'm saying that, essentially, it will be forced to do so by the PC Police and their informants. Not all religious organizations and churches practice exclusion. Link to comment
Garden Girl Posted January 23, 2020 Share Posted January 23, 2020 (edited) 40 minutes ago, sunstoned said: Not all religious organizations and churches practice exclusion. I'm sorry... I guess I'm just old fashioned (and old) enough to think of and remember a ballroom dancing couple being a man and woman, dancing the steps in the manner created for each... and if I see it that way, I don't believe in the slightest that that makes me exclusionary or some type of bigot. It is something other than a man and woman that goes against centuries of tradition and culture of the ballroom style dance. GG Edited January 23, 2020 by Garden Girl 4 Link to comment
sunstoned Posted January 23, 2020 Share Posted January 23, 2020 2 minutes ago, Garden Girl said: I'm sorry... I guess I'm just old fashioned (and old) enough to think of and remember a ballroom dancing couple being a man and woman, dancing the steps in the manner created for each... and if I see it that way, I don't believe in the slightest that that makes me exclusionary or some type of bigot. It is something other than a man and woman that goes against centuries of tradition and culture of the ballroom style dance. GG I reject the idea of tradition and culture being used to discriminate. For centuries firefighters, police and solders (in the west anyway) were all male. That has now changed. It turns out it is a change for the better. We have had two centuries in the U.S. of having only male presidents. Would having a female president go against tradition and culture? Link to comment
Garden Girl Posted January 23, 2020 Share Posted January 23, 2020 1 minute ago, sunstoned said: I reject the idea of tradition and culture being used to discriminate. For centuries firefighters, police and solders (in the west anyway) were all male. That has now changed. It turns out it is a change for the better. We have had two centuries in the U.S. of having only male presidents. Would having a female president go against tradition and culture? A little common sense in these issues... I see nothing wrong with a female president... or in certain traditionally male occupations (assuming qualifications are not altered or lowered to accommodate a female (or male, as they were when this first began opening up years ago for female officers/firefighters). I remember thinking the firefighter coming up the ladder to rescue me had better be able to handle me... a larger woman at the time... and carry me safely back down the ladder. (Just think of some of the women, and men, that you see or know). I think they got this straightened out as I see numerous women officers/firefighters today... And I''ll always remember my husband coming home one night and laughingly telling me... he had stopped at the local pub with friends when suddenly a fight started between three big bruiser fellows... someone said the police were coming... finally in walks the "officer" ... a female that was slight of build, and short enough that her billy-club was dragging on the ground, and she had all this equipment hanging around her little waist... weapon, mace. handcuffs, billy club, taser, etc. The men all burst out laughing at the sight... she did call for back-up... Just because something is forced or PC, does not make it for the better. GG Link to comment
katherine the great Posted January 23, 2020 Share Posted January 23, 2020 2 hours ago, Kenngo1969 said: It does, provided she does not expect the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints to alter fundamental doctrine regarding chastity and marriage. She's very busy with her research. I doubt she really has time to think that deeply about it. Link to comment
Kenngo1969 Posted January 23, 2020 Share Posted January 23, 2020 2 hours ago, katherine the great said: She's very busy with her research. I doubt she really has time to think that deeply about it. Fair enough. I'm sure, if for different reasons, that's true of a lot of people. Link to comment
CA Steve Posted January 23, 2020 Share Posted January 23, 2020 (edited) 9 hours ago, Garden Girl said: A little common sense in these issues... I see nothing wrong with a female president... or in certain traditionally male occupations (assuming qualifications are not altered or lowered to accommodate a female (or male, as they were when this first began opening up years ago for female officers/firefighters). I remember thinking the firefighter coming up the ladder to rescue me had better be able to handle me... a larger woman at the time... and carry me safely back down the ladder. (Just think of some of the women, and men, that you see or know). I think they got this straightened out as I see numerous women officers/firefighters today... And I''ll always remember my husband coming home one night and laughingly telling me... he had stopped at the local pub with friends when suddenly a fight started between three big bruiser fellows... someone said the police were coming... finally in walks the "officer" ... a female that was slight of build, and short enough that her billy-club was dragging on the ground, and she had all this equipment hanging around her little waist... weapon, mace. handcuffs, billy club, taser, etc. The men all burst out laughing at the sight... she did call for back-up... Just because something is forced or PC, does not make it for the better. GG The problem with your police example here is that you have presented a stereotypical example of what police do that is not completely accurate. For every incident where police are required to use physical force or the threat of physical force on those they encounter there are many other calls where police are summoned to just talk to people. The most common call police get is for domestic situations, and, they also have to deal a lot with untreated mental illness. In those situations, menacing large police officers are at a disadvantage over the officer who is slight of build, who is better able to deescalate the situation without resorting to physical force as can be seen even in your own example above where the men fighting burst into laughter at the sight of the female police officer. Edited January 23, 2020 by CA Steve Link to comment
Amulek Posted January 23, 2020 Share Posted January 23, 2020 10 hours ago, sunstoned said: I reject the idea of tradition and culture being used to discriminate. The dancesport community has, for years, been pushing to be considered as a legitimate sport. Well, if they want to have ballroom dancing recognized as a legitimate sport then they are going to need to adopt rules with respect to sex/gender just like every other elite sport - evening the playing field by requiring likes to compete against likes. Mixed couples should be competing against mixed couples exclusively (and yes, I'm talking about actual mixed couples, not just mixed identifying couples), and same sex couples should be competing against similar same sex couples. Boom: playing field leveled, with no room for complaints about judging bias to boot. This is the simple, obvious solution - one which the major dance organizations have, unfortunately, refused to adopt - at least, thus far. Link to comment
Storm Rider Posted January 23, 2020 Share Posted January 23, 2020 (edited) 17 hours ago, sunstoned said: Not all religious organizations and churches practice exclusion. They are the still the exception rather than the rule. The vast majority of Judeo-Christian schools continue to recognize and follow the teachings of God for the last 6,000+ years. Sin remains a recognized "thing" rather than being tossed to the slop bucket of the culture of hedonism and acceptance of all things desired or wanted by any individual. Edited January 23, 2020 by Storm Rider Link to comment
Ahab Posted January 23, 2020 Share Posted January 23, 2020 16 hours ago, Garden Girl said: A little common sense in these issues... I see nothing wrong with a female president... or in certain traditionally male occupations (assuming qualifications are not altered or lowered to accommodate a female (or male, as they were when this first began opening up years ago for female officers/firefighters). I remember thinking the firefighter coming up the ladder to rescue me had better be able to handle me... a larger woman at the time... and carry me safely back down the ladder. (Just think of some of the women, and men, that you see or know). I think they got this straightened out as I see numerous women officers/firefighters today... And I''ll always remember my husband coming home one night and laughingly telling me... he had stopped at the local pub with friends when suddenly a fight started between three big bruiser fellows... someone said the police were coming... finally in walks the "officer" ... a female that was slight of build, and short enough that her billy-club was dragging on the ground, and she had all this equipment hanging around her little waist... weapon, mace. handcuffs, billy club, taser, etc. The men all burst out laughing at the sight... she did call for back-up... Just because something is forced or PC, does not make it for the better. GG Probably laughing at their own silly idea that a police officer would need to be as bigger or tougher than they are to break their fight up. You mentioned the female police officer had some weapons. I'm sure she knew how to use them, too, if she should need to. Link to comment
Garden Girl Posted January 24, 2020 Share Posted January 24, 2020 (edited) 8 hours ago, CA Steve said: The problem with your police example here is that you have presented a stereotypical example of what police do that is not completely accurate. For every incident where police are required to use physical force or the threat of physical force on those they encounter there are many other calls where police are summoned to just talk to people. The most common call police get is for domestic situations, and, they also have to deal a lot with untreated mental illness. In those situations, menacing large police officers are at a disadvantage over the officer who is slight of build, who is better able to deescalate the situation without resorting to physical force as can be seen even in your own example above where the men fighting burst into laughter at the sight of the female police officer. Don't get me wrong CA... I'm all for women being in positions for which they are truly qualified... You don't know that your statement is true that large police officers "are at a disadvantage to officers who are slight of build" when deescalating or dealing with domestic situations or with people with untreated mental illness. My husband worked at Sawtell Mental Hospital and I know he faced many patients who displayed almost unnatural incredible strength, male and female. It was not the men fighting who burst into laughter... it was the other patrons who saw the female officer who was sent to handle the call... I'm glad careers have been opened to women in male dominated jobs... as long as women have to meet the same requirements as men, particularly in positions such as officers/firefighters where safety of citizens (and the officers) is a concern. GG Edited January 24, 2020 by Garden Girl Link to comment
CA Steve Posted January 24, 2020 Share Posted January 24, 2020 (edited) 37 minutes ago, Garden Girl said: Don't get me wrong CA... I'm all for women being in positions for which they are truly qualified... And I am all for true Scotsmen being in positions where they are qualified too. 37 minutes ago, Garden Girl said: You don't know that your statement is true that large police officers "are at a disadvantage to officers who are slight of build" when deescalating or dealing with domestic situations or with people with untreated mental illness. Just like you don't you know if a "a female that was slight of build, and short enough that her billy-club was dragging on the ground, " was at a disadvantage in the situation she described. The patrons burst into laughter and....? Can you definitively say the situation was made worse by the entrance of the female officer or that she was at a disadvantage? If not, then what is your point? 37 minutes ago, Garden Girl said: My husband worked at Sawtell Mental Hospital and I know he faced many patients who displayed almost unnatural incredible strength, male and female. And I have two brothers, two nephews and a brother-in-law who have spent decades in police work. Our stories are anecdotal and prove nothing. That is the point here. Reciting a story about a female police officer entering a bar fight is meaningless. Since you have no idea what would have happened had a male police officer come in. For all you know the male officer could have been every bit as nonthreatening as the female. 37 minutes ago, Garden Girl said: I'm glad careers have been opened to women in male dominated jobs... as long as women have to meet the same requirements as men, particularly in positions such as officers/firefighters where safety of citizens (and the officers) is a concern. My point, as I am sure you will agree. is that when it comes to police work, the requirements are not one size fits all and that all types are needed. What is admirable here in your story is a female officer walking into a dangerous situation by herself. That is the story that should be told, not making fun of her for her appearance. Edited January 24, 2020 by CA Steve 1 Link to comment
strappinglad Posted January 24, 2020 Share Posted January 24, 2020 I wonder if there will be changes in the rules about the attire in the contest. If 2 men dance together , will one need to wear a dress and high heels? Years ago my spouse and I went shoe shopping for her. In the store at the time was a young man trying on a pair of sillettos . He put them on and danced around the room with absolute grace and skill. Link to comment
The Nehor Posted January 24, 2020 Share Posted January 24, 2020 On 1/23/2020 at 12:12 AM, Garden Girl said: A little common sense in these issues... I see nothing wrong with a female president... or in certain traditionally male occupations (assuming qualifications are not altered or lowered to accommodate a female (or male, as they were when this first began opening up years ago for female officers/firefighters). I remember thinking the firefighter coming up the ladder to rescue me had better be able to handle me... a larger woman at the time... and carry me safely back down the ladder. (Just think of some of the women, and men, that you see or know). I think they got this straightened out as I see numerous women officers/firefighters today... And I''ll always remember my husband coming home one night and laughingly telling me... he had stopped at the local pub with friends when suddenly a fight started between three big bruiser fellows... someone said the police were coming... finally in walks the "officer" ... a female that was slight of build, and short enough that her billy-club was dragging on the ground, and she had all this equipment hanging around her little waist... weapon, mace. handcuffs, billy club, taser, etc. The men all burst out laughing at the sight... she did call for back-up... Just because something is forced or PC, does not make it for the better. GG Sounds like chauvinist exaggeration at her inadequacy. Her billy club was Dragging on the ground? Most billy clubs are between a foot and two feet in length. Was she three feet tall? 1 Link to comment
The Nehor Posted January 24, 2020 Share Posted January 24, 2020 5 hours ago, strappinglad said: I wonder if there will be changes in the rules about the attire in the contest. If 2 men dance together , will one need to wear a dress and high heels? Years ago my spouse and I went shoe shopping for her. In the store at the time was a young man trying on a pair of sillettos . He put them on and danced around the room with absolute grace and skill. You promised you would never tell that story about me! Link to comment
Garden Girl Posted January 24, 2020 Share Posted January 24, 2020 7 hours ago, CA Steve said: Just like you don't you know if a "a female that was slight of build, and short enough that her billy-club was dragging on the ground, " was at a disadvantage in the situation she described. The patrons burst into laughter and....? Can you definitively say the situation was made worse by the entrance of the female officer or that she was at a disadvantage? If not, then what is your point? My point, as I am sure you will agree. is that when it comes to police work, the requirements are not one size fits all and that all types are needed. What is admirable here in your story is a female officer walking into a dangerous situation by herself. That is the story that should be told, not making fun of her for her appearance. I didn't say the situation was made worse by the female officer but she was most certainly at a disadvantage size-wise, realized it, and quickly called for back-up. In the meantime, I'm sure the other patrons would not have allowed the situation to escalate until her backup arrived. And yes, apparently when she walked in alone the contrast between her and the fighters was surprising... 1 hour ago, The Nehor said: Sounds like chauvinist exaggeration at her inadequacy. Her billy club was Dragging on the ground? Most billy clubs are between a foot and two feet in length. Was she three feet tall? No one was less chauvinistic than my husband... the size of the young, lone female officer compared to those causing the disturbance invited the reaction of the other patrons... I'm sure her billy club did not actually drag on the ground, but close to it... dragging was the way it was described... We just had two officers ambushed in Portland while responding to separate calls... one was a female... GG Link to comment
The Nehor Posted January 24, 2020 Share Posted January 24, 2020 In a fight the ability and willingness to fight and the willingness to hurt or kill your opponent is more important than size. The most important thing to do if you are smaller than your opponent is avoid a grapple. I have been taken down by people half my size and have brought down people much larger. I do not put much stock in it. Link to comment
CA Steve Posted January 24, 2020 Share Posted January 24, 2020 (edited) 9 hours ago, Garden Girl said: I didn't say the situation was made worse by the female officer but she was most certainly at a disadvantage size-wise, realized it, and quickly called for back-up. You have yet to demonstrate that she was at a disadvantage due to her size. Who has a greater advantage? The person who can win in a physical confrontation or the person who is able to prevent one altogether? Is your assumption that police officers who are larger are more qualified for the job? For all we know had the first officer through the door been a large physically strong person bent on showing his/her strength and unwilling to call for back-up and wait, the situation may have escalated into a much worse situation. And, why is it a problem that she called for back-up? Any solo officer entering a situation as you described would have followed the same procedure. You seem to have this concept of cops as lone wolf burly men who burst into bars and stop bar fights all by themselves. You story isn't conveying the message you think it is. It is presenting a limited view of a single officer with the intent of denigrating her due to her size. Edited January 24, 2020 by CA Steve Link to comment
CA Steve Posted January 24, 2020 Share Posted January 24, 2020 (edited) deleted Edited January 24, 2020 by CA Steve Link to comment
Amulek Posted January 24, 2020 Share Posted January 24, 2020 58 minutes ago, CA Steve said: Who has a greater advantage? The person who can win in a physical confrontation or the person who is able to prevent one altogether? The person who can win in a physical confrontation. Because nobody is capable of preventing physical confrontations 100% of the time. You had mentioned before how big, menacing officers are at a disadvantage when it comes to domestic calls because they aren't as adept at deescalating the situation. Maybe that's true; maybe it isn't. I haven't seen anything which leads me to believe one way or the other. However, I have seen evidence which suggests that "when compared to male officers, female officers are at an increased risk for being assaulted in family conflict situations. Furthermore, the results suggest that female officers are at the greatest risk of being assaulted in family conflict situations when the assailant is impaired." And let's not forget another counterpoint to supposed 'small officer' advantage: If an officer is not physically capable of subduing an individual, then said officer is more likely to resort to using a weapon (e.g., baton, taser, firearm, etc.) rather than mere physical force in order to bring him under control. That certainly sounds like an escalation scenario to me. 2 Link to comment
CA Steve Posted January 24, 2020 Share Posted January 24, 2020 17 minutes ago, Amulek said: The person who can win in a physical confrontation. Because nobody is capable of preventing physical confrontations 100% of the time. Police work is a group effort and all types are necessary to provide effective enforcement. Automatically considering someone less effective because of size and gender is clearly not true. The argument GG was presenting was that the female officer was not qualified for her job because of her size and perhaps gender. Certainly when physical force is necessary a larger officer may have the advantage but as Nevo pointed out above even that is not always true. From the story GG gave, there was no evidence that the officer was at a disadvantage because GG did not mention any necessary use of force. In fact everything about her story presented an officer acting exactly how they are trained. Why this is risible is a mystery. 20 minutes ago, Amulek said: You had mentioned before how big, menacing officers are at a disadvantage when it comes to domestic calls because they aren't as adept at deescalating the situation. Maybe that's true; maybe it isn't. I haven't seen anything which leads me to believe one way or the other. No I mentioned that they may be at a disadvantage, not that they automatically are. Again GG's example was to meant to illustrate that female officers are at a disadvantage and I am pointing out they are not always. As a counter example to hers: The son of a dear friend of mine developed Schizophrenia in his 20's. Before they knew what it was and treated it, they had several incidents where they had to call the police due to his erratic behavior. They quickly learned that the only police officer who could approach him in this state were the female ones who could talk him down and get him to go to the hospital. When a male officer would approach him, he would just run away. 24 minutes ago, Amulek said: And let's not forget another counterpoint to supposed 'small officer' advantage: If an officer is not physically capable of subduing an individual, then said officer is more likely to resort to using a weapon (e.g., baton, taser, firearm, etc.) rather than mere physical force in order to bring him under control. That certainly sounds like an escalation scenario to m Size is really a relative concept. My brother worked for Orem PD a while. He would tell stories of how it would take him (6'-2" and about 200 lbs) and four or five other officers to subdue this one drunk Tongan they had to deal with on occasion. After 30 minutes of struggling with him, using nightsticks, mace and what ever brute force they could muster, he would look up at them and say "you guys are fun!" However big you are, there is always someone out there bigger, higher or both. We need all kinds in that line of work. Classifying someone as not qualified due to size and gender is simply not true. One size does not fit all here. 1 Link to comment
Garden Girl Posted January 25, 2020 Share Posted January 25, 2020 (edited) 4 hours ago, CA Steve said: Automatically considering someone less effective because of size and gender is clearly not true. The argument GG was presenting was that the female officer was not qualified for her job because of her size and perhaps gender. Certainly when physical force is necessary a larger officer may have the advantage but as Nevo pointed out above even that is not always true. From the story GG gave, there was no evidence that the officer was at a disadvantage because GG did not mention any necessary use of force. Again GG's example was to meant to illustrate that female officers are at a disadvantage and I am pointing out they are not always. Hello CA... I did not say that the female officer (or female officers in general) who responded was not qualified, nor do I automatically assume that... but the contrast between her size and the 3 men's involved was visibly surprising to the other patrons and, yes, even laughable. She did not have to use physical force because the rest of the patrons, including my husband, stood ready to assist her until her backup that she called for arrived... My example was simply telling what happened in that particular situation and was not "meant to illustrate that female officers are at a disadvantage." I agree with you that this is not always the case... Incidentally, as I mentioned, we had two separate officers in Portland ambushed this past week while responding to domestic calls... the female was killed... I'm not going to argue with you further on this... from the beach on a rainy, blustery evening... waiting for BYU men's volleyball to begin... have a good evening... GG Edited January 25, 2020 by Garden Girl 1 Link to comment
Recommended Posts