Page 3 | That this is a good example of the difference in the genders

PintOfMineralWater · 27/05/2018 11:15

"It was found to be ineffectively simply if a woman got shot/injured, men would down tools and attend her, where as if a male colleague suffered the same, it would a healthy dollop of "you ok mate?help is coming" and keep on shooting."

I don't buy this. You can train soldiers to run towards gunfire and explosions, and kill people at close range, but you can't train them out of offering ladies your arm on the battlefield? Nah.

SupermatchGame · 27/05/2018 11:16

With wheelie bins now you probably will start to see more female refuse collectors.

Sex-Based Differences in Skeletal Muscle Kinetics and Fiber-Type Composition
www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4285578/

PuntasticUsername · 27/05/2018 11:16

"women aren't usually suited to very physically demanding jobs"

That's absolutely right - that's why you never see women chasing toddlers around, lifting and carrying them, or lugging loads of shopping and a buggy back from the shops, or doing most of the housework, or lifting and moving adults to provide their intimate personal care, or doing heavy cleaning work in tough industrial environments, or...

Oh. Wait.

I'm starting to suspect that there might possibly be SOMETHING ELSE that contributes to common societal notions of the jobs men and women are best suited to.

French2019 · 27/05/2018 11:16

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.

What makes you think all the men were "happy" to do that? Have you never heard of conscription?

My dad was of the generation that still had to do national service. Despite being a man, he would never have chosen to join the army. However, some people do.

Not all men are the same, and not all women are the same either.

QuestionableMouse · 27/05/2018 11:16

And gosh, it's not like millions of women took over labor intensive jobs in WW2 and managed perfectly well... Oh, wait.

Rufustheyawningreindeer · 27/05/2018 11:16

was found to be ineffectively simply if a woman got shot/injured, men would down tools and attend her

My dad always used this as an example

I have never understood this...when a man who is obviously incapable of doing his job properly and its still the womans fault

Also there are many stories of soldiers rescuing their fallen male colleagues

corythatwas · 27/05/2018 11:18

The two reasons I would not have considered working as a builder or a bin woman were

a) the knowledge that as a woman I would be judged according to different standards

b) the sexual banter

In other words, two kinds of male behaviour that men could bloody well have decided to put a stop to.

dadshere · 27/05/2018 11:20

slug makes the most sensible point. One woman drops off and bang, women can't do something. I couldn't do army training, does that mean no woman can. My dh couldn't do it either.

SupermatchGame · 27/05/2018 11:25

SOMETHING ELSE that contributes to common societal notions of the jobs men and women are best suited to.

Is it not likely to be a mixture of both?

Original poster

walkswithmydog · 27/05/2018 11:26

Ok, we'd all be happy to do this kind of work eh?
It's all just talk, if there were a hundred vacancies tomorrow for going down the mines, i wonder how many would.

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

OP posts:

French2019 · 27/05/2018 11:28

Ok, we'd all be happy to do this kind of work eh?

No, absolutely not, but I can't see my DH or any of my male colleagues signing up for that kind of work either!

SciFiFan2015 · 27/05/2018 11:28

I can prove the opposite if you like? I'm female. Served in a combat arms regiment (UK) passed all the required physical tests. Commanded 2 troops of 40+ men.

God I miss it.

corythatwas · 27/05/2018 11:29

Just seen your later posts, OP.

Just for your information, women DID serve on the frontline in both world wars. They drove ambulances, worked as nurses and served as auxiliary forces. In WW2 they also manned anti-air craft guns. Women were parachuted into occupied France to work as spies, which was a pretty risky thing to do. The Soviet army had regular female battalions in both wars.

What you would have wanted to do, OP, is neither here nor there. There were plenty of male draft dodgers too.

crunchymint · 27/05/2018 11:31

I remember reading when men were campaigning against women being allowed to go to Cambridge University. A leaflet was produced that said 50% of women who attended Cambridge had had an abortion. Used to show that the women attending were of "low character". There were two women who had been allowed to attend. One had had an abortion.

lovetheway · 27/05/2018 11:32

Until recently in history, having a baby was the most risky physical job, and one which carried the highest mortality rate. Yet women did it.

ChazsBrilliantAttitude · 27/05/2018 11:36

OP many men are neither physically suited nor inclined to do the jobs you list. Why aren’t you commenting on them?

corythatwas · 27/05/2018 11:36

And we have plenty of female MNers who have seen active service. Not a job I would want to do, but then neither would any male member of my family. So we don't do it. That's the beauty of equality: more freedom to choose.

And the job I do do, as a historian, is one that 100 years ago, would have been considered totally unsuitable for a female. What with our little lady-brains and things. Plenty of statements by male academics to that effect.

Now many of the most eminent scholars in my field are women. Have the medieval manuscripts in Latin and the collections of bones from ancient cemeteries suddenly changed their nature to become, somehow, less exclusively suitable for men? Or has the structure of our brains changed? Or maybe, just maybe, it wasn't for other people to decide what we could do or couldn't do.

RunRabbitRunRabbit · 27/05/2018 11:37

Many years ago I was asked why on earth I wanted to be an engineer: all those rough men and tough work conditions.

I've heard regularly about how women just don't have the right kind of brains for this and that and the other.

I see plenty of evidence to the contrary in my life working in those industries.

Yes, there are more men. No, it's not an indication that women should be barred / discouraged from those professions.

Some men are nurses. Some women are mechanics. It's OK. Chill the fuck out. We don't all have to obey the stereotypes.

imgs.xkcd.com/comics/how_it_works.png

Original poster

walkswithmydog · 27/05/2018 11:38

Some ridiculous get outs here, and so absolutely untruthful, and hypocritical too for that mattter. The fact of the matter is the majority of women would not WANT to.....work down a mine, work on a roof, work on a building site, or dig roads etc etc. What the hell is wrong in admitting that, and it's no reflection on women neither. Why should it even be seen as a criticism.

OP posts:

French2019 · 27/05/2018 11:39

OP, why are you not engaging with the valid points that many people are making.

You're right that most women would not want to work down a mine, but neither would most men. Will you at least acknowledge this?

Original poster

walkswithmydog · 27/05/2018 11:40

runrabbit i am chilled. You chill the fuck out. Its you who sound irate.

OP posts:

RunRabbitRunRabbit · 27/05/2018 11:41

You wrote Women aren't suited to certain roles, and vice versa.

Then Why should it even be seen as a criticism.

You've not well represented your own point of view in your opening post if the latest one is your true opinion.

Original poster

walkswithmydog · 27/05/2018 11:42

french of course most men wouldn't, but it's only men who do the job, many had no choice.

OP posts:

corythatwas · 27/05/2018 11:44

PuntasticUsername Sun 27-May-18 11:16:28
*"women aren't usually suited to very physically demanding jobs"

That's absolutely right - that's why you never see women chasing toddlers around, lifting and carrying them, or lugging loads of shopping and a buggy back from the shops, or doing most of the housework, or lifting and moving adults to provide their intimate personal care, or doing heavy cleaning work in tough industrial environments, or...*

THIS. None of the work I observed on the building sites I worked on was in any way as heavy as the job my ex-SIL does on a daily basis as a carer in a nursing home for dementia patients. Nor did it carry the risk of being physically assaulted on a daily basis. But somehow as long as there is a sufficient dose of caring involved, nobody notices that there is also heavy physical work and a reasonable chance that you will have been put in hospital by the end of the day. It only becomes unsuitable for females if there is no caring to go with it.

ffs I was the carer of a disabled teenager for several years. It did more harm to my body than any of those pits of rubble I emptied out and transferred onto spoil heaps in my 20s. But it's not on my CV and nobody ever asked if I wanted to do it.

RunRabbitRunRabbit · 27/05/2018 11:44

I am irate. You are correct. I have been being told for years that people like me are not suited to my job. It gets a bit wearing. Random person starting a thread just to highlight that in her opinion women are crap at soldiering does indeed make me feel angry.

I mean why even say it? What were you trying to prove?