Equal rights for firemen constitutes a public hazard: "A common apartment door can be forced open in 10 to 20 seconds; a security-enforced door takes 45 to 60 seconds […] information has leaked that f

ENTP · 2013-02-20T22:30:59+00:00

You know who's super under-represented in the fire fighting force? Quadriplegics. Why the discriminatory anti-paralysis policies!?

/s

empathica1 · 2013-02-21T01:11:29+00:00

if you can't do the job, you shouldn't have it. I can't break through a secured door, so I shouldn't be a firefighter. If a woman can break through one in 45 seconds, then she should be a firefighter.

TheDongerNeedsFood · 2013-02-20T23:19:02+00:00

As you sow, so shall you reap.

I have been saying for years now that these disgusting feminist policies of lowering the physical requirements for police and firefighters is going to cost lives, and unfortunately it looks like I am going to be proved correct.

Those physical requirements are in place for a fucking reason. When you are trying to get into a burning building to save someone's life, guess what, YOU MIGHT HAVE TO KICK THE FUCKING DOOR IN, AND TOSS ASIDE SOME BURNING FUCKIND DEBRIS TO GET TO THAT PERSON.

Hiring people who do not have the physical ability to do things like that is going to cost the lives of police officers, firefighters, and the people who are caught in such situations.

But its all good. Such sacrifices are completely worth it in order to satisfy the political agendas of the fem-nazis, and make-up for the centuries of oppression that women have suffered at the hands of the patriarchy.

I was going to post this in r/justiceporn, but the inevitable loss of life that is going to occur is nothing to celebrate. However, you can't help but take note of the fact that this is occurring in Sweden, that feminist's dream of a country where they have apparently decided that people's feelings are more important than making sure that the people with whom we entrust our lives are actually capable of protecting our lives.

circuitology · 2013-02-21T02:21:13+00:00

Okay, listen.

I'm a man. I'm fucking weak as shit, it would take me half an hour to break down a door, if I could even manage at all. And I am full grown 23 year old.

There are lots of women who are stronger, fitter, and more physically able in general.

This is nothing to do with men or women. If there is a physical requirement for the job, let anyone who is able to fulfill the requirement do the job, regardless of their gender. It is false to say that female firefighters are hazardous, regardless of the current situation or data. The true statement would be "It is hazardous to employ firefighters who do not possess the minimum fitness and strength required to effectively perform their duty".

2013-02-20T22:32:44+00:00

10 minutes to break down a door? That's fucking pathetic. You want your kid burning alive just so Suzie Q feminist can be a firefighter?

subzero_600 · 2013-02-20T22:13:08+00:00

One of the first shots has been fired to try and push the wave of useless equality back.

Froolow · 2013-02-21T11:53:56+00:00

This is completely bullshit journalism, and it should shame you you've fallen for such obvious crap. Even worse is downvoting Luxpreliator who is at least offering a valid opinion even if you disagree with him.

The source - the entirety of the factual basis of the article on which you are basing your opinions, is as follows

When two female firefighters were put to the task, it reportedly took them eleven minutes.

So we see here a whole host of problems:

Two out of how many female firefighters? If it is two firefighters out of ten thousand who then immediately failed the course, what does it matter?
What is the null result? How many male firefighters failed to break down the door in ten minutes? We are not told
Who 'reported' this? The source is unattributed. I could say, "Three male firefighters failed to get the door open" and you'd have exactly the same ability to check it as this quote
Which kind of "firefighters were practicing forcing open security doors"? Were they new trainees? If they were, is ten minutes a normal amount of time for a new trainee to take to open a security door?
How can anyone pretend this study was conducted without bias? If the women had been forcing open doors all day and the last door took ten minutes this is wholly different from the stroy the article intends to portray
What is the implication of this article? That women are ten times weaker than men? Does that sound like a reasonable conclusion? Although we know that women are - in general - weaker than men, we also know that the very strongest women can still lift about three-quarters as much as the very strongest men.

Consider this; if there was an unattributed comment in a Swedish-language internet news article saying, "When we reviewed the data, we found two fathers were completely unable to look after their children", would you conclude that this was good evidence fathers in general are unable to look after their children? Of course not. This article is less scientific than that.

binarypillbug · 2013-02-20T23:07:41+00:00

am i missing something? where did they get their information?

9iLsgs1TYI · 2013-02-20T22:10:28+00:00

Reminds me of this ManWomanMyth video.

petemate · 2013-02-21T13:01:06+00:00

The article, and the comments made here about how gender-prioritization shouldn't be prioritized above actual skills, are completely valid, and I completely agree with those. If there is a woman with the skills needed, there is no reason that she shouldn't be a firefighter. End of story.

What bugs me, is the generalizing statement that "female firefighters take more than 10 minutes to break down a door". This exact statement is very much what keeps us(as in mens rights movements) back. It is a discriminating and generalizing statement. We need to free ourselves from that kind of talk. We need to be specific and focused on the actual issues here, instead of turning each issue into a debate on "men vs. women". The issue in this case is that two female firefighters were unable to do a part of their job in a satisfying way. And the issue then changes into how females are prioritized, at the cost of actual skills. This is not a "women should not be firefighters"-debate, and we need to stop turning it into one, whether we do it intentionally or unintentionally. We need to show without any doubt that we are not a club of chauvinists. We need to show that we care about true equality, regardless of gender. We care about the skills that each individual can bring to a position, not their gender. This whole debate is about individuals, not about genders. We need to make that clear in each and every issue that we address.

dinky_hawker · 2013-02-20T22:12:17+00:00

isn't there room on the fire truck for people assigned different tasks?

galt88 · 2013-02-21T00:02:24+00:00

I made this point back in college in the early 90's. I said I don't want to have to depend on some chick to carry my 250 lbs over their shoulder, out of a burning building. People looked at me like I had three heads.

chavelah · 2013-02-21T01:03:06+00:00

Sounds like some really shitty firefighting to me. How nice that it was identified in a training exercise. Hopefully that precious pair was subsequently trained in the use of their firefighting equipment - because it's not like their male colleagues were busting down security doors with their bare hands. They were using fucking AXES.

The point of training is to become better at what you do. I'm not going to throw a shitfit because two female firefighters in another country failed a training exercise. I'll save my shitfit for the incredibly lax standards that allow fat people with weak muscles and no cardio capacity to serve in jobs that should be reserved for the physical elite - firefighting, police work, etc. This is the pressing problem I see when I look around me, and it appears to apply to members of both sexes. Maybe if we paid these public servants better (or at all - the firefighters who would come to MY door are fucking VOLUNTEERS), we'd get a better class of people signing up for the job?

ThePigman · 2013-02-21T01:47:38+00:00

Not only that, buy I suspect that the only reason the door goes down after ten minutes is because there is no longer any house to support it!

Lawtonfogle · 2013-02-21T03:14:55+00:00

Equal rights are not the hazard. It is the unequal rights given by having different physical standards for a job which requires certain physical standards that causes the hazard.

Luxpreliator · 2013-02-21T07:09:37+00:00

This sounds like bullshit to me, did they not give these women any fucking tools? If were are talking about metal door and frame as a security door then there are numerous options to get it open. It doesn't take a male police unit 60 seconds to get a door down if they choose to not use explosives. Security doors are metal on metal construction typically, just drop some pry bar or a halligan bar in between the jamb and the door, whack it in to set then break it open. It is mechanical advantage that opens doors not brute force. Firefighters want the doors to remain in somewhat decent shape to be able to close the door to control air flow. There are hand operated hydraulic jamb spreaders that can grant a single person the power to bypass a door but hand tools are more versatile for other scenarios.

I can't imagine any way in which this is an equal test where a man was able to break a door down in 60 seconds vs 660 seconds for a woman.

gibson_ · 2013-02-20T22:57:34+00:00

This is such nonsense. Sure, on average most men are larger than most women. This is pretty straightforward biology.

But plenty of women outsize plenty of men.

However, this is all pretty nullified, since firefighters carry these: http://s3.amazonaws.com/cooltools_legacy/halligan-m.jpg

It's called a halligan, and it exists for one reason: absolutely destroying anything that gets in its way.

(This has been a long, long debate that I've had with my girlfriend, who is a former firefighter. If I had to choose between her busting into my house to save me while it's on fire, or just about anybody else, I would choose her. After having her explain how these things actually happen, it illustrated why this argument is kindof moot.)

Hounds_of_war · 2013-02-20T22:12:50+00:00

Wouldn't there be some fitness requirement?

drinkthebleach · 2013-02-21T06:49:53+00:00

It takes me more than 10 minutes to break down a door and I'm a dude, looks like it pays okay though, where do I sign up?

McFeely_Smackup · 2013-02-21T17:27:02+00:00

When I was in the Army, it was right in the training manual that the average time for a squad to set up a GP Medium tent was 20 minutes, or 2 hours for a female squad. Just black and white, no bullshit about it.

DerpaNerb · 2013-02-21T05:10:08+00:00

You know what? I have absolutely zero problem with equality in ANY profession... but people (not really anyone here) need to realize that this isn't equality. This is just diversity for the sake of diversity... which means men are being discriminated against, and unfit people for the job are taking their place and as the article concludes... people WILL die, all for the sake of being "PC".

Set the fucking standard, and any person, whether they be male, female, black, white, red, yellow, 4 legged, 1 legged, 1 armed, deaf, blind, whatever... If they can pass the standard requirements and/or are the best candidate, then they get the job period. THAT is equality.

annoyedatwork · 2013-02-21T10:39:29+00:00

I once saw an exercise where firemen were evacuating a hypothetically crashed train. None of them looked very fit. An aged staff who'd had more close encounters with donuts than with the things that could arise at the job. Dragging dolls by their feet and so on out of the rubble. Dropping them off the stretchers. If the requirements are only there for getting in, what good are they really other than at keeping women out? Used to be that requirements were maintained and you had to perform to keep your job. Now it's all just gobbledygook we can't demand too much out of the poor men and women. We got no more equality, just less quality. Thanks Feminism!

2013-02-21T13:49:46+00:00

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ERwzqvs7vvU

5th_Law_of_Robotics · 2013-02-21T16:07:39+00:00

Equal rights for firemen (or any job) doesn't mean equal outcomes or quotas.

It means giving everyone the chance to prove they are up to the physical or mental standards required for that job.

If half the men who apply can do the job but only 1% of the women that is equality assuming gender wasn't the reason they failed (but rather physical disparities that benefited men and were necessary for the job).

Peter Bergh says that the union, which represents around 9,000 of the 15,000 Swedish firefighters, has been watching with increasing concern how the emergency services in recent years have focused more and more on diversity, and accordingly less on professional skills.

When you select heavily for one trait that isn't quality then quality will necessarily suffer because you're artificially limiting your talent pool.

“No, after eleven minutes there is, in theory, no life left to save on the other side of the door,” replies Henrik Persson.

Yes but they will die happy knowing that they were going to be rescued by a woman. If she had been even marginally competent for the job that is. . .

This would be another example of feminism literally putting politics ahead of lives. I know they don't give a damn about the men who will burn to death because of this but figure at least half will be women. That ought to concern them.

2013-02-22T14:07:09+00:00

"...have focused more and more on diversity, and accordingly less on professional skills."

Story of the fucking modern era.

Tubeez · 2013-02-21T04:27:18+00:00

Yay for fucking equality

"In order to motivate this, a problem was constructed, Henrik Persson believes. It was claimed that the jargon among firefighters was offensive and condescending, a macho culture, and that had to be countered, no matter the cost. This later spread like wildfire through all of Sweden.

“And has one ever heard of the jargon being such a problem in other single-gender professions, such as garbage truck drivers, nannies or nurses? A problem so worrisome that it justified a lowering of professional standards?” But this is exactly what is happening within the emergency services. The normal tests for physical skills were scrapped, enabling a much wider range of people to become firefighters."

Heterohabilis · 2013-02-21T08:32:05+00:00

I'm not too bothered by this. Asphyxiating while trapped in my apartment is a better way to die than having Brenda Berkman drag me down 4 flights of stairs.

TracyMorganFreeman · 2013-02-21T03:40:53+00:00

"Firefighter, not fireman!"

"Well you can't very well fight a fire on this side of the door"

Title	Equal rights for firemen constitutes a public hazard: "A common apartment door can be forced open in 10 to 20 seconds; a security-enforced door takes 45 to 60 seconds […] information has leaked that f
Author	telnet_reddit_80
Upvotes	125
Comments	157
Date	February 20, 2013 10:00 PM UTC (13 years ago)
Subreddit	Posted in /r/MensRights
Original Link	https://old.reddit.com/r/mensrights/comments/18wulr/equal-rights-for-firemen-constitutes-a-public-/
Archive Link	https://theredarchive.com/r/MensRights/equal-rights-for-firemen-constitutes-a-public.1606653 https://theredarchive.com/post/1606653

Comments