TheRedArchive

~ archived since 2018 ~

  • Subreddits

      Popular

    • /r/askTRP
    • /r/TheRedPill
    • /r/MarriedRedPill
    • /r/MensRights
    • /r/MGTOW
    • /r/PurplePillDebate
    • /r/WhereAreAllTheGoodMen
    • Other

    • /r/AllPillDebate
    • /r/AlreadyRed
    • /r/altTRP
    • /r/AntiFeminists
    • /r/askFDS
    • /r/askMRP
    • /r/askRPC
    • /r/becomeaman
    • /r/BlackPillScience
    • /r/Chadfish
    • /r/Divorce_Men
    • /r/EverydayMisandry
    • /r/ExRedPill
    • /r/FemaleDatingStrategy
    • /r/FeminismStopsWhen
    • /r/GEOTRP
    • /r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates
    • /r/MalePsychology
    • /r/Male_Studies
    • /r/MenSupportMen
    • /r/MGTOW2
    • /r/MuslimRedPill
    • /r/newTRP
    • /r/PussyPass
    • /r/PussyPassDenied
    • /r/RedPillBooks
    • /r/RedPillParenting
    • /r/RedPillWives
    • /r/RedPillWomen
    • /r/RedPillWorkplace
    • /r/RPChristians
    • /r/seduction
    • /r/ThankTRP
    • /r/TheRedPillStories
    • /r/trpGAME
    • /r/TRPOffTopic
    • /r/TrueBlackPillMGTOW
    • /r/WhereAllTheGoodMenAre
  • Blogs

      Popular

    • Dalrock
    • Heartiste
    • Illimitable Men
    • Return of Kings
    • Rian Stone
    • The Rational Male
    • Woujo
    • Other

    • Artful Prudence
    • A Voice for Men
    • Alpha Game
    • Black Label Logic
    • Caleb Jones
    • Captain Capitalism
    • Corporate Machiavelli
    • Days of Game
    • Deep Strength
    • Dicipres
    • Donal Graeme
    • Female Misogynist
    • Free Northerner
    • Gaming My Wife
    • Good Looking Loser
    • Hawaiian Libertarian
    • In Mala Fide
    • KillToParty
    • Kill Your Inner Loser
    • Krauser PUA
    • LaidNYC
    • Married Man Sex Life
    • NO MA'AM
    • Omega Virgin Revolt
    • Pook's Mill
    • Random Xpat Rantings
    • Red Pill Theory
    • Red Pill Wifery
    • RedPillDad
    • RedPillDoctor
    • Seasons of Tumult and Discord
    • Sigma Frame
    • The Feminine Woman
    • The Futurist
    • The Masculine Principle
    • The Modern Man
    • The New Modern Man
    • The Obsidian Files
    • The Power Moves
    • The Private Man
    • The Red Pill Room
    • The Red Quest
    • The Rules Revisited
    • The Spearhead
    • Troy Francis
    • Wintery Knight
    • Young Man Red Pill
  • Books
  • Dictionary
  • @TRParchive
  • Please help TheRedArchive stay alive

Women have an easier fitness test for the FBI

PoppaDR3W

January 2, 2017
238 upvotes
/r/MensRights
https://imgur.com/gallery/5A4OV
Download the post

Want to save the post for offline use on your device? Choose one of the download options below:

PDF TXT EPUB
Share
Share Tweet Reddit Email
Post Information
Title Women have an easier fitness test for the FBI
Author

PoppaDR3W

Upvotes 238
Comments 95
Date January 2, 2017 1:43 AM UTC
(9 years ago)
Subreddit Posted in /r/MensRights
Original Link https://old.reddit.com/r/MensRights/comments/5likxs/women_have_an_easier_fitness_test_for_the_fbi/
Archive Link https://theredarchive.com/r/MensRights/women-have-an-easier-fitness-test-for-the-fbi.934789
https://theredarchive.com/post/934789
Red Pill terms in post
fitness test
Top posts by PoppaDR3W

Woman to become FDNY firefighter... despite failing crucial physical test

464 upvotes
May 3, 2015
/r/MensRights

Despite testing for the same exact position, women have easier physical fitness standards than men

120 upvotes
July 24, 2015
/r/MensRights

Men have a harder physical fitness test for local law enforcement careers

102 upvotes
April 24, 2015
/r/MensRights

How is this not discrimination? (NY)

68 upvotes
April 18, 2017
/r/MensRights

I see a lot of "no men in women in the women's bathroom" posts a lot on social media lately

61 upvotes
April 24, 2016
/r/MensRights

Only men interrupt women (Found on my Facebook feed)

45 upvotes
May 5, 2016
/r/MensRights

Saw a NJEA commercial that bothered me...

25 upvotes
June 20, 2017
/r/MensRights

Moms eat free... on Easter?

12 upvotes
April 5, 2017
/r/MensRights

Comments

[–]Coluphid 35 points36 points37 points 9 years ago (22 children) | Copy Link

The FBI also compromised on their side arm caliber (10mm) because women couldn't handle the recoil.

So the abortion that is the .40S&W was born.

[–]NoturAvrgeBear 8 points9 points10 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

They recently were in the talks of going back to 9mm so at least there's that.

[–][deleted] 4 points5 points6 points 9 years ago (20 children) | Copy Link

This is worrying me, in my country some police men died because, (experts and other policemen opinions) the caliber of their weapons was too small to give enough knockback to put the target on the ground or at least make him unable to respond (it was 8 or 9 mm I don't remember, Switzerland in case you want to look that)

I have no idea if 10mm is enough... anyone knows ?

[–][deleted] 4 points5 points6 points 9 years ago (11 children) | Copy Link

10mm "Auto" has roughly 800-1000 joules of energy with a shot.

9mm "Parabellum" has roughly 500-600 joules of energy with a shot.

Going to be honest here, 9mm WILL kill you dead with a shot if you get hit in the head/heart/major artery.

But 10mm will fuck you up even worse.

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points3 points 9 years ago (7 children) | Copy Link

Oh, so that's gonna do the job :)

Unless body armor I guess ?

[–][deleted] 2 points3 points4 points 9 years ago (6 children) | Copy Link

Body armour can stop most pistol rounds, but 10mm auto hits like a brick.

10mm Auto is comparable to .357 magnum, which is stopped by level II armour.

IIIA vests can stop 10mm Auto.

[–][deleted] 2 points3 points4 points 9 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link

Oh so it's totally a caliber that's gonna be functional.

Nice :)

[–]its710somewhere 2 points3 points4 points 9 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

Even if it doesn't penetrate the body armor, the amount of force will be enough to knock you back (maybe even down) and disorient/slow you. In these kinds of situations, that can be the difference between life and death. So it's useful even in situations where the other would be equivalent to a BB gun.

Think of it like this:

One is a baseball (the 10mm) and the other is a tennis ball (9mm).

Sure, I could hurt you pretty badly if I hit you in just the right spot with a tennis ball, but if I threw a baseball just as fast and hit that same spot, it would do a lot more damage.

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points3 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Okay thanks for clarification :)

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points3 points 9 years ago* (2 children) | Copy Link

edited by /u/spez

[–]its710somewhere 3 points4 points5 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

The person experiencing the recoil is expecting it, and braced for it. The person being shot might not be. This situation is the "maybe even down" I was talking about.

I have seen people knocked down by handgun fire during gang shootouts in the housing projects I grew up in.

The force can definitely be enough to knock someone off balance, though I agree that in most cases it is not. I've seen it happen with my own eyes, so it is definitely possible.

[–]bufedad 1 point2 points3 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Don't forget that the slide (and spring) absorbs some of the impact

[–]probably_a_squid 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

Don't you also have to take into consideration how much of the bullet actually sticks in the target? If the bullet exits the target with any speed, than a certain portion of the energy has not been delivered to the target. A bullet that goes right through you will certainly fuck you up, but it won't push you back as much as a bullet that stays inside of you, assuming equal mass and velocity of the bullet.

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

Indeed you're correct, but assuming a non-surprised person, most bullets won't knock someone ever by FORCE. They will knock you over via other methods though.

[–]probably_a_squid 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

I really wouldn't know. I've never been in a gun fight (or even fired a gun) so I will defer to the experience of those who have. I'm just interested in the physics of it.

[–]Coluphid 4 points5 points6 points 9 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link

Let's put it this way.

My boss hunts mountain sheep with a bow.

For protection from bears he takes along a Glock in 10mm.

[–]Ja66aDaHutt 3 points4 points5 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Is your boss Joe Rogan?

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

Your boss sounds like a serious badass.

[–]Coluphid 2 points3 points4 points 9 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

He really is. He is all I could aspire to be as a man and more.

Rockstar government job, hunts mountain sheep on horseback in the rocky mountains. Cowboy. Gun nut. Beautiful farm house he built himself. Knockout 10/10 genius wife. Two healthy sons. Peak physical fitness.

All that is man. Swears by 10mm as a last resort in Grizzly country out of rifle season, otherwise he takes a .45-70.

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

hunts mountain sheep on horseback in the rocky mountains.

with a bow

Ok just wow I didn't think that level of overly manly man still existed.

[–]Coluphid 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

They exist. You've just got to get out of the cities.

The country and forest. It's where the flavour is.

[–]CynixCS 1 point2 points3 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

We use 9x19 para HP since 2006 (?), no idea what exact laboration though.

[–]elebrin 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Can they make explosive rounds in that size? Then it doesn't matter how big it is, so long as it penetrates.

[–]Apexbreed 23 points24 points25 points 9 years ago* (6 children) | Copy Link

I wonder what ridiculous excuse askfeminists would make for the blatant inequality....

[–]JulianneLesse 18 points19 points20 points 9 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link

They were excusing male objectification in a thread today

[–][deleted] 5 points6 points7 points 9 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

I like when they pretend people pointing out the double standard involved with "objectification" (sexualization*) are actually "crying" about it.

"Women deal with this literally every day! And it happens to men once and they're already crying about oppression! #masculinitysofragile #herpderp"

Plz. Men don't actually care if we're sexualized. It affects literally no one, other than the models doing it... and it affects them, in the way that they get paid for doing a job.

[–]iainmf 3 points4 points5 points 9 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

Men don't actually care if we're sexualized

I quite like to be sexualised, or at least get a compliment or two every year.

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points3 points 9 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

By "care" I meant... men don't view it as a problem. Can probably think of a better way to put it.

[–]iainmf 1 point2 points3 points 9 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

I knew what you meant. I was just trying to make a joke.

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points3 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

ah, yay text communication.

[+]billswinthesuperbowl points 9 years ago [recovered] (34 children) | Copy Link

And the army, and the police academy, firefighters, actually in most public safety jobs they lower the fitness standards for women

[–]tothecatmobile 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (32 children) | Copy Link

They also lower it for age.

[–]TracyMorganFreeman 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (31 children) | Copy Link

Men are 40% stronger than women in the upper body on average but must do twice as many pushups in the armed forces.

The age argument is used as a way of trying to claim isn't based on requiring a certain level of fitness for a each group.

Except those groups aren't evaluated by similar respective levels of fitness.

They are little more than political levers go ensure you have "enough" of certain groups while meeting manning requirements. They greatly lowered standards during the 20th century wars, especially world War 2

[–]tothecatmobile 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (30 children) | Copy Link

Whats that got to do with different fitness standards for different age groups?

[–]TracyMorganFreeman 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (29 children) | Copy Link

The age argument is used as a way of trying to claim isn't based on requiring a certain level of fitness for a each group.

[–]tothecatmobile 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (28 children) | Copy Link

So why does is it different for different ages?

[–]TracyMorganFreeman 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (27 children) | Copy Link

Because ultimately it has little to do with the ability to do the job.

It's keeping people in while meeting a) certain politically correct quotas and b) ensuring they don't look out of shape in uniform.

It's largely about making sure the military looks good. Unfortunately it endangers a lot of people by doing so.

[–]tothecatmobile 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (26 children) | Copy Link

Army fitness tests have been scaled according to age since at least 1946.

A terribly PC time.

[–]TracyMorganFreeman 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (25 children) | Copy Link

Funny how they lowered standards during WWII.

It's almost as if it's based on manning requirements, like I said. I was also describing the way it is today.

[–]tothecatmobile 1 point2 points3 points 9 years ago (24 children) | Copy Link

WWII ended in 1945.

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

I know, but I like to bring it to light whenever I see stuff like this posted on social media.

[+]doggo_rocket points 9 years ago [recovered] (7 children) | Copy Link

Thats the same for police, military, and pretty much all the jobs like that.

Personally I think the bar should be lowered for men and raised for women to meet in the middle. Seems like the fairest compromise to me.

[–]Smartass_76 37 points38 points39 points 9 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

the ones for men are already laughably low

[–]ThePigmanAgain 2 points3 points4 points 9 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

Yep. Let's face it, unless a dude weighs 300 pounds, 29 pushups is no great feat of strength. The average man can easily train himself to do 100 if he actually tries.

[–]Smartass_76 4 points5 points6 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

I tried 100 for a long time and I cap at 70.

[–]_GrandPoobah 6 points7 points8 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

there shouldn't have to be a compromise, if you lower the standards you weaken the military, police etc. if you can not qualify for a job you should not get it.

[–]Cthulhu__ 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

Alternatively, just set fitness standards per job; fire people that are supposed to wrangle high pressure hoses and break down doors could have higher requirements than drivers or crane operators. There's airport fire engines that are just robotic and don't need as much physical strength.

[–]TracyMorganFreeman 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Meh the women would probably be overrepresented among crane operators/drivers but say they should be paid equally because they're all "firefighters"

Granted they're all "firefighters" in the same way a janitor is a "service/maintenance technician", but broad categorizations are often used to sell the wage gap.

[–][deleted] 4 points5 points6 points 9 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

The real question is why they are using such out-dated irrelevant fitness measures. Sit-ups?

[–]tyrelrolly 1 point2 points3 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

The initial fitness entry tests they are usually set at the lowest possible level allowing people to join and go through a body recomposition to become accustomed to the type of physical activity they are going to be doing and then testing them later at that level for their specific roles within the organization.

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Core strength is gauged by the situps (in their minds). It should be timed planks.

[–][deleted] -1 points0 points1 point 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Might be a proxy for overall fitness.

[–]Jazz567 3 points4 points5 points 9 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

300 meters within 59 seconds? That's a cakewalk.

[–]Mighty72 5 points6 points7 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

I eat a lot of cake, so I can't do that walk.

[–]unbelievablepeople 2 points3 points4 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Well, apparently it's a cakewalk that a lot of female FBI agents can't manage, or else the FBI wouldn't need to lower the standard for women.

[–][deleted] 18 points19 points20 points 9 years ago (9 children) | Copy Link

None of those seem particularly difficult. If you are of decent strength and agility you should be able to beat these.

The Australian Army also has different fitness tests depending on gender.

[–][deleted] 27 points28 points29 points 9 years ago (8 children) | Copy Link

That's not the point. The point is it should be EQUAL, regardless of difficulty.

[–]JulianneLesse 7 points8 points9 points 9 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

Honestly, I think if the job requires someone to be healthy different requirements could be justified because men are naturally stronger but for a job like a firefighter where the agility and strength are important they should be the same for both sexes

[–][deleted] 16 points17 points18 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

How is that justifiable? Even if men are stronger how does that justify the aerobic/endurance portions? And stength, as far as I know, is potentially part of the job. Say they need to make an arrest and the person doesn't comply - the agents should all be held to the same standards for physical fitness to increase the chances of arresting them successfully and/or minimizing the chance of them getting hurt or even killed, or someone else hurt or killed.

All it comes down to is TRAINING. Exercise. Push yourself. These numbers aren't outrageous to begin with, therefore the standards should be uniform across the board.

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points3 points 9 years ago* (5 children) | Copy Link

The point is it should be EQUAL, regardless of difficulty

Why? The test is a general test to encourage overall fitness, not a specialized test for specific job requirements. This is for acceptance into the academy, not a strength test to see if you can perform specific duties. If we were talking, for example, about firefighters? Then yes, the physical tests involved there should absolutely be equal because there absolutely is a minimum requirement to be able to hoist someone on your shoulders while running through a burning building.

But that's not the case here. This isn't a test about physical required strength on the job. It's about separating the men from the boys, or in this case, the women from the girls. It's a fitness test to make sure you're not a fat lazy shit cunt who can't use critical reasoning to understand that there is a very real biological difference between men and women and that representing this difference in generalized fitness tests is far more equal than an idiotic "LOL LETS GIMP AN ENTIRE GENDER CAUSE I CANT INTO REASONED THOUGHT!"

[–][deleted] -1 points0 points1 point 9 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

Do I literally have to restate it? Equality. Literal equality. Want to help endorse physical fitness? Watch Pumping Iron, don't allow the standards for physical fitness tests for law enforcement and other emergency services to lag behind for women. It's not right and people can and will get hurt and killed. End of story.

[–]geniice 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

Do I literally have to restate it? Equality. Literal equality. Want to help endorse physical fitness? Watch Pumping Iron,

Better living through chemistry? Goverment agencies tend to be a bit jumpy about that.

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

What?

[–]geniice 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

Schwarzenegger's steroid use.

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

It was meant as a way to get people pumped up. Like how watching an action movie gets people amped up? I didn't literally means use steroids, just like I wouldn't literally means for someone to engage in a high speed chase after watching an action movie.

[–]atheist4thecause 2 points3 points4 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

If those are accurate, that is an absolutely massive difference among push-ups.

[–]crazypants88 2 points3 points4 points 9 years ago (6 children) | Copy Link

Also for the US Marines. Was checking if I passed the physical requirements for joining just for fun and there it is staring me in the face. While men have to do at least three chin ups. women seemingly just have to hang there for 15 sec.

If I was marine I would be fuming at the idea that my and my squad's safety comes after appeasing women.

[–]TracyMorganFreeman 2 points3 points4 points 9 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

I remember a couple of girls in boot camp complaining how hard the 1.5 mile run was for them.

I looked at them and reminded them i had to lap them 2 and a half times to pass.

[–]crazypants88 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

Fuck, they had the gall to complain while under a lower standard?

Marine material right there....

[–]TracyMorganFreeman 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Well to be fair I'm 6'4 and even for my height I have long legs.

They were mainly wishing they had longer legs and wonder why I didn't pass easily(it was because I had broken my leg weeks earlier, and feet a few weeks before, and wasn't fully healed)

[–]dolandoes 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

i feel like doing 3 chin ups would be easier than just hanging 15 seconds lmao.

[–]crazypants88 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

Not if you're just hanging on the bar, which is how I understood it.

[–]dolandoes 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

oh, i thought it meant hanging in a chin-up position, not just dangling limp.

[–]jeff_the_nurse 1 point2 points3 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

But...but...it's okay--women are weaker than men! That makes it okay! Oh, but women are also equal to men.

[–]bastardstepchild 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

Well, it's a fact that criminals run slower when being pursued by a woman, so this is logical.

[–]Cthulhu__ 2 points3 points4 points 9 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

implying the FBI actually runs

Don't they have black cars and only do work that involves showing up wearing black sunglasses, a suit, and whipping out an ID badge?

[–]SchalaZeal01 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

2 of them run a show called Supernatural.

[–]ThePigmanAgain 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

I can see the crims now, "Run! It's a woman who can do 15 pushups!" LOL! So lame. What the hell is 15 pushups when you weigh only 150 pounds? Not a fuck of a lot. 29 at 190, that's something.

[–]majortom22 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

I'm hoping that there is more to the test than meets the eye in some way.

59 seconds for 300 meters? I ran 52 for 400 meters. If you can't run a 300m in 59 seconds you're not only unfit for the FBI, you're a lardass.

[–]Trev_ilnatguard 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

same for military

[+]slaplante99 -8 points-7 points-6 points 9 years ago* (3 children) | Copy Link

Why would these two be equal? Our body are different and their performances​ to. We are naturally more strog/fast then women. Its in our gene...

[–]Pugs_of_war 12 points13 points14 points 9 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

Because this isn't a measure of peak ability for your gender. It's just a low bar fitness test. There's no reason that both genders couldn't or shouldn't reach it.

Even if it were a more difficult test for a more physical role, the scale should still be the same. If you get a job that requires lifting 100lb boxes, should women get the job if they max out at 85lbs?

Peak ability is an arbitrary number in this. The test isn't to see if you're as good as you could reasonably get, it's just to see if you're fit. This is the minimum they'll accept.

[–]ConvertsToMetric 1 point2 points3 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Mouseover or click to view the metric conversion for this comment

[–][deleted] 4 points5 points6 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Do you to a criminal would go easier on someone because they're a woman? I want all agents and officers of law enforcement to be held to the same standards when it comes to physical fitness. If a woman gets through and isn't strong enough to do the job at pivotal moments in time (and yes, there are capable women in the emergency services fields and the likes), then they themselves or someone else could get hurt or killed.

[–]BuddhaB -1 points0 points1 point 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

I really don't have a problem with this. What are the physical requirements of a FBI officer? This might be put into place to make sure the officers are reasonably healthy. How often does an FBI agent use there gun? If this was Army/firefighters/SWAT I would think differently. But an FBI member is just a pen pusher.

[–]richarddbuckley4 -4 points-3 points-2 points 9 years ago (9 children) | Copy Link

This makes complete sense because women are smaller and weaker on average?

[–]_GrandPoobah 7 points8 points9 points 9 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

so using that logic do you think people with autism should be able to qualify for jobs with lower grades than everybody else?

[–][deleted] -1 points0 points1 point 9 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

actually people with autism are great for jobs they have high interest in, good luck getting an autistic to succeed in a job they hate though. I you are an employer and you interview an autistic guy who is really passionate about the career they may very well be your most hard working employee

[–]_GrandPoobah 2 points3 points4 points 9 years ago* (0 children) | Copy Link

well autism is a spectrum, people with high functioning autism may very well be good employees but it might also severely impact their life not allowing them to achieve certain goals.

[–]crazypants88 3 points4 points5 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

No it doesn't since the job is the same regardless of gender.

[–]Chrisganjaweed 3 points4 points5 points 9 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

Will the criminals they will have to deal with be weaker and smaller on average?

[–]richarddbuckley4 -1 points0 points1 point 9 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

No but if the fbi require a woman for a job then it would be unreasonable to require the same physical capabilities of a male athlete

[–]Chrisganjaweed 2 points3 points4 points 9 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

but why do they require the same physical capabilities of a male athlete for the job in the first place?

[–]geniice -1 points0 points1 point 9 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

They don't. Those aren't athlete standards. Those are reasonably fit standards. If they then want you at athlete standards they will then train you to those standards.

[–]Chrisganjaweed 1 point2 points3 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

but they do require those reasonably fit standards. maybe there's a reason for that?

Browse all authors
You can kill a man, but you can't kill an idea.

© TheRedArchive 2026. All rights reserved.
created by /u/dream-hunter