NY Woman to Become Fire Fighter Without Passing Physical Exam

[Trippy Turtle]

And here I thought hospitals hiring nurses with hemophobia some time in the future was a cheap joke from Kingdom Hospital.

Thanks USA, you have proven to me that you can be whatever you want in life no matter if you meet the requirements or not as long as you are a necessity to meet the diversity quota, other people's life be damned.

Everyone wins.

Except perhaps the person who dies or the house that burns because she couldn't keep up. But lets face it, that's unlikely.

Yes man, I mean how likely it is that someone will die in a city with 26,531 structural fires reported last year [http://www.nyc.gov/html/fdny/pdf/stats/2014/fire/cw/fire_cwsum_cy14.pdf], I mean that's only what? 72 fires A DAY?! But who cares about that, all that matters is that everyone wins amiright?

I find it extremely unlikely that a situation will come up where she was unable to save someone when someone who did pass the exam would have been able to.
How of those fires was someone saved by a firefighter?
How many of those rescues would have been impossible for someone who couldn't pass the exam?

I'm going to bet its not quite 72 a day. Or 72 ever. And to be perfectly honest I'd prefer someone under qualified to be there to save me than nobody at all. Probably just me though.

 

[Ishigami]

Not surprised in the slightest.
Isn?t there are also a process going to get more or at least some women at all into army special forces?
I think their proposed plan is or was to lower the standards of the physical test? obviously?
So yea not surprised.

I think I will gain some weight and sue my way into a physically demanding job using anti-discrimination laws? common fat shaming really? ? You guys are so oppressive!

 

[Gengisgame]

I find it extremely unlikely that a situation will come up where she was unable to save someone when someone who did pass the exam would have been able to.
How of those fires was someone saved by a firefighter?
How many of those rescues would have been impossible for someone who couldn't pass the exam?

I'm going to bet its not quite 72 a day. Or 72 ever. And to be perfectly honest I'd prefer someone under qualified to be there to save me than nobody at all. Probably just me though.

Your wording this as if there is a shortage of potential applicants and they needed to lower the bar, although a more sensible option would be to promote the service.

A person less qualified will be the one attempting to rescue you because they want more poster women in the firefighting service, it's clearly not a case of them turning away capable women for being women if they need to hire those less capable.

 

[CrystalShadow]

It's dumb, and dangerous. But I can see why it happens.

The thing is, the research suggests that women may have a harder time with this, but they should still be able to do it...
Lowering the bar is fine if the job doesn't really require it, but in an area where physical fitness is critical, this is counterproductive, and really, kind of insulting.

Anyway... Last research I read on the topic of physical difference between men and women showed that amongst trained athletes with similar levels of training, men were indeed on average stronger, BUT, this difference became almost non-existent (less than 2% difference) if you controlled for bodytype/size.

Meaning, if you want to avoid setting up gendered events (in say, sports), define categories by size/bodytype, and it should be more or less fair.
This would still mostly result in women competing against other women, and men against other men, but there will be a small group where there is overlap...
No need to define it by a person's sex, and you still give people a reasonable chance...

That has nothing to do with a job like this though. If you're not strong enough to do it, you getting the job anyway is a liability that could get people killed.
That's not OK...

 

[LordLundar]

I find it extremely unlikely that a situation will come up where she was unable to save someone when someone who did pass the exam would have been able to.
How of those fires was someone saved by a firefighter?
How many of those rescues would have been impossible for someone who couldn't pass the exam?

I'm going to bet its not quite 72 a day. Or 72 ever. And to be perfectly honest I'd prefer someone under qualified to be there to save me than nobody at all. Probably just me though.

Actually the count would be 72 because it's not just a matter of dragging unconscious bodies around. There's still dragging around fire hoses and being able to keep them under control when in use. In fact, there is not a single aspect of fighting a fire that is NOT physically demanding. Hell, just wearing the outfit means roughly 45 additional pounds and that's before any equipment is applied.

 

[Ariseishirou]

This is really annoying. Especially since there already are 40 other women who passed, including other women in her own graduating class. Accept that you failed, eat some oats and hit the gym, come back stronger next year, same as any man who failed.

Though rest assured: no one hates her right now more than those other 40 women. I remember one girl in my PE class whinging and wheedling that the pull-up requirement be dropped to get a perfect score on our fitness test, because "girls can't do pull-ups" so the test was "sexist." *****, I can do ten. Admit that you, personally, can't hack it, stop looking for excuses, and shape up.

 

[Snotnarok]

Good to know we're pushing for gender bias over the ability to perform the job adequately.

Had this argument recently, the person insisting that because women are genetically predisposed to be less strong than men they should skew the tests to make it "give them more equal chance".

To which I respond, no, that's dumb. You need to be able to perform certain physical prowess to be able to do difficult tasks, like haul a 200lbs unconscious person out of a building ...that's on fire. If you can't do such a thing you're NOT fit to do the job and that's regardless of gender. If you're 100 pounds and tiny, you're PROBABLY not a good fit for the FD.

Totally okay with women being fire fighters, I really don't care who's carrying my dumbass out of a burning building but I don't want them to be LITERALLY dragging me through fires across the floor by my ankle. I want them to be strong, tall, able....sounds like I'm asking for something totally different there.

 

[Guerilla]

At least those people burning to death will know there's a bit more equality in the world.

And by equality he means preferential treatment based on gender, aka the feminist way.

 

[NordicWarrior]

I'm a firefighter. I never took any of those tests.

 

[Trippy Turtle]

I find it extremely unlikely that a situation will come up where she was unable to save someone when someone who did pass the exam would have been able to.
How of those fires was someone saved by a firefighter?
How many of those rescues would have been impossible for someone who couldn't pass the exam?

I'm going to bet its not quite 72 a day. Or 72 ever. And to be perfectly honest I'd prefer someone under qualified to be there to save me than nobody at all. Probably just me though.

Actually the count would be 72 because it's not just a matter of dragging unconscious bodies around. There's still dragging around fire hoses and being able to keep them under control when in use. In fact, there is not a single aspect of fighting a fire that is NOT physically demanding. Hell, just wearing the outfit means roughly 45 additional pounds and that's before any equipment is applied.

You do realize she was able to complete the test, except it took 22 minutes which isn't all that much worse than the 17 they allowed.
If I thought she was going to be useless as a firefighter I'd agree with all of you. As it stands, she is going to be capable of meeting those physical demands.
Sure, its not an ideal situation. But its nowhere near as bad as everyone hear likes to say it is.
I personally know a cop that don't meet the physical requirements (Though he may have when he got in). He's a respected member of his team. You make it sound like shes going to be sitting in the truck getting paid for doing nothing while taking up the slot of a more qualified member. If she doesn't pull her weight she will probably be kicked out.
I get the feeling this sort of reaction is just stemming from all the feminist bullshit on here and people are taking the chance to overreact in retaliation the moment a woman gets slight preferential treatment.

 

[omega 616]

She should be able to pass it, other women have and there are plenty of women outside the fire department that would be physically able to.

This is just a PR disaster the mayor will get flak for doing it and more flak if or when she fucks up. More flak will get shot than during WW2

 

[LordLundar]

You do realize she was able to complete the test, except it took 22 minutes which isn't all that much worse than the 17 they allowed.
If I thought she was going to be useless as a firefighter I'd agree with all of you. As it stands, she is going to be capable of meeting those physical demands.
Sure, its not an ideal situation. But its nowhere near as bad as everyone hear likes to say it is.
I personally know a cop that don't meet the physical requirements (Though he may have when he got in). He's a respected member of his team. You make it sound like shes going to be sitting in the truck getting paid for doing nothing while taking up the slot of a more qualified member. If she doesn't pull her weight she will probably be kicked out.
I get the feeling this sort of reaction is just stemming from all the feminist bullshit on here and people are taking the chance to overreact in retaliation the moment a woman gets slight preferential treatment.

There is a reason for those time limits and that's because a fire can spread quickly. Often times a firefighter's success is measured in seconds and a five minute delay is disastrous. And no, I don't expect her to be paid for doing nothing, I do expect that she will be in one of those situations where seconds matter and someone will die as a result of her not being able to do the job.

As for your officer friend, there is a significant difference. If a suspect gets away because of him not meeting the requirements, the suspect can be picked up later before something else happens. If a firefighter fails in their role due to not meeting the requirement people WILL die and much more damage WILL happen.

And if you want to get into the feminist nonsense, let me point out that you are defending preferential treatment for someone BECAUSE of their gender because diversity is more important than people's lives. But hey, I'm sure when families of people who could have been saved and owners of buildings that were turned to rubble because she couldn't move fast enough will be thrilled to know that their lives and property were small sacrifices in the name of diversity. Especially when it's realized that which they had lost was all over a PR stunt.

 

[Reasonable Atheist]

Ugh. I'm a huge feminist, and I hate it when stuff like this happens. I think we can all agree that true equality qould be to determine the physical requirements necessary for the job, and then demanding them from everybody without ever letting gender be a part of the equation.

On a related note, can we please kill the myth that sexist hiring procedures is the sole reason there are no female firefighters? Sure, that's almost certainly part of it, but I'd say a bigger reason is that fewer women apply for that job in the first place. And if you get feweer female applicants, then fewer women than men will get hired even if the average woman is every bit as qualified as the average man. Just like the jobs of being a plumber, carpenter, mechanic or construction worker, there usually just aren't as many female aplicants as male ones.

Is that some reasonable feminist? Someone get a camera!

 

[Sonicron]

Oh dear. Not sure if it's such a good idea to apply political brown-nosing to departments inextricably bound up with the physical safety of your voters, mister mayor.

 

[Qizx]

As if this wasn't enough, just moments ago I saw this article [http://www.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/news/world-news/man-68-faces-rape-charges-after-posing-as-model-for-fifty-shades-of-grey-dates-31198049.html] about a 68-year old man who'd coaxed women into Fifty Shades of Grey -inspired sex while posing as a dashing model, with total consent from his partners. He is now faced with multiple charges of rape because oh no, the impossibly gorgeous model who promised to be the knight of your dreams didn't actually turn out to be that. The guy's a scumbag, definitely, but a rapist? Fuck off, if the women had kept the blindfold on all the time, I bet they would have been perfectly happy.

The women consented to sex with the gorgeous model. Not with the 68 year old man. He had no consent. He raped them. There is no grey area here.

This is totally off topic BUT: I have a friend who's GF said she was on the pill. They had been dating quite a while and had no reason not to believe her, she was lying. She got pregnant and POP there goes his life he wanted. Did she rape him? He consented to sex with a woman who was not lying and was on birth control. No she didn't rape him, what she did was scummy as hell, and should be some sort of illegal but not rape. Icing on the cake, some guy got charged for rape because he poked holes in the condom, same thing different genders.


OT: This is just despicable as can be. Jobs are given based on aptitude, NOT on gender. If a job requires certain skills to do, and only people with those skills can do it, they're the ones who should get the job. ESPECIALLY when it involves lives being at risk. I really wanted to be a surgeon but my hands aren't very steady, should I argue and fight until they let me do surgery despite my shaky hands? HELL. NO.


EDIT:

Man, everyone sure is being sexist about this. Obviously, the physical requirements are just another symptom of the patriarchy and like the patriarchy they must be dismantled. You can only have true equality is when some people are more equal than others. If a woman or minority can't meet the qualifications of something a straight white male can then obviously we must lower to standards for them to make them more equal, Equality 101.

Who are you arguing with? Who is everyone? The reaction I'm reading to this is overwhelming confusion and scorn.

I remember this exact issue coming up about 20+ years ago, this question of "should a woman be a firefighter if she cannot meet the rigorous physical requirements for the job". I can't imagine what school of argument would be used to support "yes". I'm all for breaking glass ceilings, but this is a life and death job. Her life is at risk, her co-workers lives are at risk, the people they are tasked to serve...their lives are at risk.

Silly.

Dude I'm about 100000% certain that guy is joking.

 

[Vykrel]

well this is just completely ridiculous. i love women, but some jobs are very physical and if you cant pass the requirements, you shouldnt be given the job. what if this woman has to pull an adult male (maybe even a fellow firefighter) out of a burning building? the fact alone that she is a woman would make this exponentially more difficult.

 

[2HF]

This is totally off topic BUT: I have a friend who's GF said she was on the pill. They had been dating quite a while and had no reason not to believe her, she was lying. She got pregnant and POP there goes his life he wanted. Did she rape him? He consented to sex with a woman who was not lying and was on birth control.

He didn't consent to "sex with a woman who was not lying and was on birth control", he consented to sex with Person A and had sex with Person A. These women consented to sex with Person A and were raped by person B.

 

[Qizx]

This is totally off topic BUT: I have a friend who's GF said she was on the pill. They had been dating quite a while and had no reason not to believe her, she was lying. She got pregnant and POP there goes his life he wanted. Did she rape him? He consented to sex with a woman who was not lying and was on birth control.

He didn't consent to "sex with a woman who was not lying and was on birth control", he consented to sex with Person A and had sex with Person A. These women consented to sex with Person A and were raped by person B.

They both lied about physical differences in/about their bodies. You're completely wrong. Person A IS Person B. Should we charge Barney from HIMYM with multiple counts of rape? He pretended to be VonMatterhorn (or whatever the name was). Just because you lie about who you are does NOT make it rape. It's scummy, makes you a liar and a jerk, but it's not rape.