Lower standards for women have no effect on the military? and No it's still an irrelevant comment no matter how you persist with your nonsense.(Original post by Drewski)
It's about an arbitrary difference that, in the vast majority of roles, has no effect - negative or otherwise - on the armed forces. Therefore it's a very relevant comment and serves to highlight how your arguments are largely pointless.
x
Turn on thread page Beta
-
Ali1302
- Follow
- 7 followers
- 9 badges
- Send a private message to Ali1302
- Thread Starter
Offline9ReputationRep:- Follow
- 261
- 05-02-2016 22:01
-
Ali1302
- Follow
- 7 followers
- 9 badges
- Send a private message to Ali1302
- Thread Starter
Offline9ReputationRep:- Follow
- 262
- 05-02-2016 22:13
Everyone, I'm not going to respond to any other post till tomorrow, I need some time away from TSR. Please no one go crazy while I'm gone and good night.
-
- Follow
- 263
- 05-02-2016 22:18
(Original post by Ali1302)
Lower standards for women have no effect on the military?
And stop acting like it's lower standards across the board, it's not. A female pilot has to meet exactly the same requirements as a male pilot for everything that matters, same aptitude, same skill levels. Everything's the same. And that's matched in every single role across the armed forces. The only thing that's different is the fitness minimum requirement. Note that word. Minimum requirement. Most will need substantially above that to actually get in.Last edited by Drewski; 05-02-2016 at 22:28. -
The Arsonist
- Follow
- 4 followers
- 2 badges
- Send a private message to The Arsonist
Offline2ReputationRep:- Follow
- 264
- 05-02-2016 22:25
(Original post by Drewski)
In the roles they currently perform, no.
And stop acting like it's lower standards across the board, it's not. A female pilot has to meet exactly the same requirements as a male pilot for everything that matters, same aptitude, same skill levels. Everything's the same. And that's matched in every single role across the armed forces. The only thing that's different is the fitness minimum requirement. Note that word. Minimum requirement. Most will need substantially above that to actually get in. -
AlwaysWatching
- Follow
- 8 followers
- 10 badges
- Send a private message to AlwaysWatching
Offline10ReputationRep:- Follow
- 265
- 06-02-2016 10:48
(Original post by Ali1302)
Yet you have no problems with standards being lower for 'equality targets. Also, your example doesn't make sense in this context.Last edited by AlwaysWatching; 06-02-2016 at 10:53.
Reply
Submit reply
Turn on thread page Beta
Related discussions:
- Miscellanous Thread VI
- Your most controversial view?
- The Sikh Society
- Film Reviews Thread
- US Presidential Election 2016 official thread
- The Official 2017 Cambridge Applicants Thread [part 2]
- The Israel/Palestine Conflict Mk. IV
- The Sikh Society
- Singapore Kopitiam
- The Official Cambridge Offer Holders Thread 2016 Entry
TSR Support Team
We have a brilliant team of more than 60 Support Team members looking after discussions on The Student Room, helping to make it a fun, safe and useful place to hang out.
This forum is supported by:
Updated: February 6, 2016
Share this discussion:
Tweet