That this is a good example of the difference in the genders

[walkswithmydog]

en.mogaznews.com/World-News/915265/First-woman-to-join-infantry-regiment-quits-after-two-weeks.html

Doesn't this just show that there is no such thing as gender neutrality, there never has been and never will. Women aren't suited to certain roles, and vice versa.

What slug said.

So which other roles are women unsuited for then?
Never see bin women, road diggers, building site labourers, scaffolders, roofers, sewage workers, ariel riggers, deep sea fisher women.......the list is endless. Obviously you'll get the odd few, but most women wouldn't even WANT to do those jobs.

And do you indictoctrinate your own children with the jobs list. Nice

How depressing to still hear people dismiss a gender just because ONE person dropped out. Please don't generalize like this.

I disagree with you, OP, for the reasons that PP have posted already.

Sometimes, I do wonder if people post views that are inflammatory just to get a rise out of other users.

OP, you seem to be a bit hard of logic. You acknowledge that lots of men drop out, and that apparently proves nothing. You acknowledge that one female - with significantly less social support than the men - dropped out, and somehow it proves that the role is unsuitable for all females?

Obviously, if this was a trans woman, that makes the whole argument even more ridiculous, but I'm not sure if that was the case or not.

You haven’t travelled much have you OP if you haven’t seen women working as construction labourers, road diggers etc.
Have you thought about why there might be cultural barriers to women doing some of these jobs?

but most women wouldn't even WANT to do those jobs.

They used to say that about engineers and bus drivers, now there are a lot more. So I think we have to be careful not to make too many gender/ stereotype arguments, but I know what you mean. I agree there are some sex based differences - men are generally better at carrying bricks and rubbish due to physical capacity.

Isn't there a difference between not WANTING to do a job and not being ABLE to?

Yes OP more men work in these jobs. Does that mean a women can't?
Most men wouldn't WANT to be beauty therapists, or any other "feminine" job but some do and do it fine

Look at nursing - used to be a female profession. Lots of male nurses now though so clearly they CAN do it

My SIL was the first female firefighter in our county.

The point i'm making is that women aren't usually suited to very physically demanding jobs, nothing at all inflammatory about saying that. If it wasn't the case we'd be seeing bin women, road diggers and scaffolders all the time. Why aren't we?

Two female bin collectors here.

I've worked as a labourer on a building site.

Seems like you've only posted this to gloat which is unpleasant.

The point i'm making is that women aren't usually suited to very physically demanding jobs, nothing at all inflammatory about saying that.

Of course that’s inflammatory. Just saying it isn’t doesn’t make it so.

There’s no we,there’s you. There are females in construction and refuse
Just because you haven’t encountered it doesn’t mean it doesn’t happen

@stillnotbored

"despite a plethora of observable differences from different skin, eyes, joints, blood and including brain function and composition months before birth"

References please. I've not heard of these observable differences between sexes.

It's always been the way. Men are allowed to be individuals, if a man fails it's because he wasn't good enough. Women are seen as a collective hive mind, if one woman fails it means all women aren't good enough.

I recall reading a memoir written by one of the first female medical practitioners in the UK. She wrote about watching an autopsy while still a student, she started to feel faint and sick. She fought against the feeling of needing to faint because if she had it would have been used as evidence that women shouldn't be there. Several men in the group fainted but of course this wasn't taken as evidence that men shouldn't be there.

Yes,do share the observable difference research

It’s true, Women aren’t suited to physical demanding jobs- that’s why you never see athletes who are women.... oh wait

Never see bin women, road diggers, building site labourers, scaffolders, roofers, sewage workers, ariel riggers, deep sea fisher women.......the list is endless. Obviously you'll get the odd few, but most women wouldn't even WANT to do those jobs.

We women are naturally inclined to avert risks; hence any extreme jobs with high mortality are left to you men.

When we had the two world wars, millions of men lost their lives, as a woman i'd have hated to be in the trenches, having no choice. How many women today would be happy to have done that, if they had have been allowed.

Your logic is really interesting, OP.

OP: one woman dropped out of infantry training so that proves women aren't suitable

MN: but majority of male recruits drop out too

OP: but if majority of male recruits drop out too that proves women aren't suitable

fyi I have seen women in most of the jobs you mention (including fishing)

yes, numbers are small, but don't you think it might just take more determination to take on a job where everybody keeps telling you you're not really suited and you know any failure on your part will be proving somebody's sexist point?

fyi I used to work on building sites, not as a builder but as a digging archaeologist which is also a physically arduous job; most of my workmates were ex-builders, ex-roofers etc.

I met plenty of men who were incompetent or lazy or for some reason didn't pull their weight; nobody ever said "oh, that proves men are shit at the job"

The female workers otoh had to remember that if they didn't pull their weight, it would reflect on all the women.

For the record, that was never said of me: I was bloody good at swinging a pickaxe and pushing a wheelbarrow up slopes in those days. The job was no less hard than the work done by the builders on the same site, but the reason I felt comfortable doing it was that there was, at least, a little more acceptance of women in the workforce. I was averagely good, good enough to earn my keep; but to do a job in a very male-dominated industry I would have had to be outstanding.

Never see bin women, road diggers, building site labourers, scaffolders, roofers, sewage workers, ariel riggers, deep sea fisher women.......the list is endless. Obviously you'll get the odd few, but most women wouldn't even WANT to do those jobs

On one of those 'make aimless British teens try out hard jobs that the immigrants normally do' type TV programmes, the most successful of the group who tried out fishing was a woman and I think she might even have got a job out of it.

And bin emptying with wheelie bins looks pretty easy these days, I'd do it. Certainly easier than some of the jobs I've done, such as categorising and hand sorting several tonnes or hazardous waste each day.

As far as the military example is concerned, there would have to be a fair few women do it and quit, before statistically significant conclusions can be drawn, when 60-70% of men don't make it either.

The point i'm making is that women aren't usually suited to very physically demanding jobs, nothing at all inflammatory about saying that.

It's astonishing we don't all die during our first experience of pregnancy and child birth then. Yet some of us manage to do it more then once!

You have a very modern western-centric view point. Across the world it's women who carry out the labour intensive back breaking work. Those pictures you see of young children who walk miles to a river to collect water, and miles back carrying a heavy full water container. They're all girls.

We women are naturally inclined to avert risks; hence any extreme jobs with high mortality are left to you men
How selfish, but that really isn't the reason and you know it, but if it is the reason, it still proves my point, that not all jobs are suited to women.

When we had the two world wars, millions of men lost their lives, as a woman i'd have hated to be in the trenches, having no choice. How many women today would be happy to have done that, if they had have been allowed

How many men (in reality 18-25 YOs who half of Mumsnet argue are still children, or would otherwise want in education rather than risking their lives in the battlefield) would have been happy to do that these days?