In my thread about gender differences in poker, the major real difference I saw was that the male respondents (I don't think any women read RGP) for the most part, basically resorted to crude insults, rather than address the issue.
But one of the shallowest responses I got was my reference to the COPS TV show, wherein I stated that I have seen few (if any) instances of women cops performing their duties to the same standards as the male cops.
Every excuse can be made, but it becomes painfully evident that female cops cannot subdue male perpretrators without help from a MALE (in at least one case, from a male civilian bystander).
I could buy these excuses for a time, say after three or four instances in which the female cop contributed virtually nothing to the apprehension and cuffing of an uncooperative male suspect.
But I must have watched 100+ hours of these episodes over the years--- which btw generally display a favorable attitude toward women cops. And the overwhelming evidence is that the women cops rely on the males to do the heavy lifting. The women simply cannot get it done.
They cannot run as fast, they cannot fight as well, and they lack in physical strength. A great many of them seem to be "quota" hires to stave off discrimination lawsuits.
It makes me wonder how ideologically devoted to "feminism" that someone has to be, to ignore such thoroughly documented evidence.
There is certainly a role for women in law enforcement. If a female loved one were to be raped, I would definitely wish the crime to be investigated by a female detective.
But if I were being battered in a parking lot by your average male thug (I'm too old now to compete with them without a weapon), and if I saw an average woman cop rushing to my defense, I would probably think something like, oh crap. How am I going to defend both myself and her?
> In my thread about gender differences in poker, the major real > difference I saw was that the male respondents (I don't think any > women read RGP) for the most part, basically resorted to crude > insults, rather than address the issue.
> But one of the shallowest responses I got was my reference to the COPS > TV show, wherein I stated that I have seen few (if any) instances of > women cops performing their duties to the same standards as the male > cops.
> Every excuse can be made, but it becomes painfully evident that female > cops cannot subdue male perpretrators without help from a MALE (in at > least one case, from a male civilian bystander).
> I could buy these excuses for a time, say after three or four > instances in which the female cop contributed virtually nothing to the > apprehension and cuffing of an uncooperative male suspect.
> But I must have watched 100+ hours of these episodes over the years--- > which btw generally display a favorable attitude toward women cops. > And the overwhelming evidence is that the women cops rely on the males > to do the heavy lifting. The women simply cannot get it done.
> They cannot run as fast, they cannot fight as well, and they lack in > physical strength. A great many of them seem to be "quota" hires to > stave off discrimination lawsuits.
> It makes me wonder how ideologically devoted to "feminism" that > someone has to be, to ignore such thoroughly documented evidence.
> There is certainly a role for women in law enforcement. If a female > loved one were to be raped, I would definitely wish the crime to be > investigated by a female detective.
> But if I were being battered in a parking lot by your average male > thug (I'm too old now to compete with them without a weapon), and if I > saw an average woman cop rushing to my defense, I would probably think > something like, oh crap. How am I going to defend both myself and > her?
> I know. I'm a sexist bigot. Oh well.
LOL.. NEVER SAY "WHOA" IN A MUDHOLE !!
Thank you Lord for the TV Scooter Morons we are about to deceive
______________________________________________________________________ : the next generation of web-newsreaders : http://www.recgroups.com
> In my thread about gender differences in poker, the major real > difference I saw was that the male respondents (I don't think any > women read RGP) for the most part, basically resorted to crude > insults, rather than address the issue.
> But one of the shallowest responses I got was my reference to the COPS > TV show, wherein I stated that I have seen few (if any) instances of > women cops performing their duties to the same standards as the male > cops.
> Every excuse can be made, but it becomes painfully evident that female > cops cannot subdue male perpretrators without help from a MALE (in at > least one case, from a male civilian bystander).
This has little to do with poker. I don't consider it shallow to say that both male and female cops are trained not to pursue a suspect alone, but that males are more likely than females to disregard that training. It goes along with the poker-related observation that males are more likely than females to go off on a particular opponent (and also that males seem less likely to go off on a female opponent).
Yeah, women on average run slower than men, jump less well and come off badly in grappling. None of these have anything to do with poker. They aren't central to police work either, although they do have SOMETHING to do with it.
2) Every excuse can be made, and you continue this tradition. But it becomes painfully evident, after a huge preponderance of evidence, that it is a mistake to believe that men and women can perform the roles of police officer equally.
They cannot. No more so than they can play football, box, or serve in the combat infantry, with the same effectiveness as men.
They can't.
Yet, that obvious reality seems unbearable for some people to admit. They are committed to the fantasy that men and women are equal.
They aren't equal. They are equally good, but at different things, and in different ways.
Oh, the pain of it. Which is why the excuses continue, and the ignore- ance is so persistent.
= = = =
On Aug 21, 5:13 pm, "Stephen Jacobs" <jac...@comcast.net> wrote:
> > In my thread about gender differences in poker, the major real > > difference I saw was that the male respondents (I don't think any > > women read RGP) for the most part, basically resorted to crude > > insults, rather than address the issue.
> > But one of the shallowest responses I got was my reference to the COPS > > TV show, wherein I stated that I have seen few (if any) instances of > > women cops performing their duties to the same standards as the male > > cops.
> > Every excuse can be made, but it becomes painfully evident that female > > cops cannot subdue male perpretrators without help from a MALE (in at > > least one case, from a male civilian bystander).
> This has little to do with poker. I don't consider it shallow to say that > both male and female cops are trained not to pursue a suspect alone, but > that males are more likely than females to disregard that training. It goes > along with the poker-related observation that males are more likely than > females to go off on a particular opponent (and also that males seem less > likely to go off on a female opponent).
> Yeah, women on average run slower than men, jump less well and come off > badly in grappling. None of these have anything to do with poker. They > aren't central to police work either, although they do have SOMETHING to do > with it.- Hide quoted text -
> 2) Every excuse can be made, and you continue this tradition. But it > becomes painfully evident, after a huge preponderance of evidence, > that it is a mistake to believe that men and women can perform the > roles of police officer equally.
> They cannot. No more so than they can play football, box, or serve in > the combat infantry, with the same effectiveness as men.
Audie Murphy was a 98 pound weakling.
I love the people who claim that women can't carry a 50 pound pack of gear over a hill. If that was the standard I'd have been 4F.
