Do you think that sex should be used as a reason to be hired for a job?

[Lady Freedom]

And can you believe that many in my area STILL think that women should not do jobs like firefighting, policeing, armed forces, construction,ect.

[ewagner]

1. before or after

the interview?

[HEyHEY]

2. I wish it wasa reason...I could kill two birds with one stone

[jono]

3. Only if the job is something like "genital model." (nt)

[Blaze Diem]

10. Ann Coulter-Genital Model..

Hey didn't she want to be a genital model before she became a wet nurse for the rabid right? Wonder what ever happened with that dreamjob?

[Don_G]

4. Well...

You would NEVER catch me selling ladies cosmetics.

[jmowreader]

40. There are men who do that...

And using the product is not required.

I wouldn't do it either, but only because they work on straight commission. And I ain't playing that commission game.

One product I would never sell: Bras. Sounds fun, but there is such a high risk of lawsuit. "That man told me to get undressed and touched me." Uhh...how else do you measure someone for undergarments?

[THUNDER HANDS]

5. reason, no.....but it should definately be a perk

::raises eyebrows, tips cigar and jiggles mustache and he does his best Groucho Marx impression::

:D

[SOteric]

6. Usually, no. But I can see reasons

For hiring only women as counselours in a rape victims support centre, or domestic violence support.

I conceive it possible that I might see reasons to hire only males into some jobs as well, though right now, exactly what escapes me.

[HEyHEY]

14. hard hard labour maybe

let's face it there are some jobs only REALLY big guys can do well. That would put me outta the loop too...I'm just an average sized joe. SO I couldn't say.....be a very good robuster...thos bundles ae heavy!

[SOteric]

15. Well, I know you probably think that

but I've known some very powerful women who could likely do the same work as a very powerful guy. And honestly, if it's so demanding that even a powerful person would have a hard time with it, it's probably too high risk to be done by anything but a machine.

I was thinking more along the line of Men's Underwear model, Big-Brother's organisations, etc...

[toddzilla]

21. i beg to differ..

one of the most unpleasant jobs i've ever had is setting concrete forms for basement foundations. you carry these forms from the truck to the house layout and set them in place around where the basement will be. maybe the newer ones are lighter, but each form weighs in at 115 pounds and they are about 3 feet wide by 8 feet tall. Did it for 8 hours a day, for two weeks then i quit because of the toxic chemicals they used. i really doubt anyone but a large guy could even last a few hours much less full time.

not trying to nitpick, but we are physically different.

btw i'm 6'2", 280lbs.

edit:spelling

[SOteric]

25. Differ all you want,

I do know women who could likely do it. Including some very large and very powerful women who work in various aspects of construction.

Remember the female 'wrestler' Chyna?

I don't dispute that we're physically different. I dispute that there are jobs which are impossible for any women to do. Or, for that matter, any men.

I believe there are possibly men who could have the requisite compassion and counselling skills to work at a rape crisis centre and contribute positively. But for various reasons, including sensitivity to the trauma undergone by those women, I believe it would be unwise to test the metals of such a counselor in that environment.

And I think it possible that there are some (not a great many, but some) women who are as powerfully built and capable at physical labour as are some men.

I believe that job restrictions should be written to the requirements of the job, not the gender of the applicant. If it's required that one lift 120 lb. objects and lay them carefully for many hours per day, then that is a job requirement which will likely rule out the majority of women and most slightly built men. But the sex of the applicant can't ultimately determine the qualification.

[toddzilla]

30. well, the wrestler chyna

was anabolically enhanced. although i'd be a fool to say that NO woman could do the aforementioned job, it'd be pretty foolish to claim that it would be anywhere near a reasonable percentage.


funny thing is, they would take bets on how long a prospective employee would last at this job, average being about 2 or 3 days. it really was hell.

the painting company i work for has one woman that works for us. she's a little bitty thing, maybe 100 pounds soaking wet. never has any problems carrying the 5 gallon buckets up and down the stairs along with the airless spray gun. I've worked with her on more than a few occasions and she's a much better worker than the majority of the men we have. I actually find myself working harder when i'm paired with her just to keep up!!

[SOteric]

34. Probably so

(with regard to Chyna's enhancement) but that's irrelevant to the point I'm making.

Simply stated, I think most jobs should only be restricted by the qualifications necessary to do the job. In many jobs, that could well rule out the majority of one gender. But the job spec shouldn't say "can't be a woman," it should say: "must be able to lift X number of pounds for lengthy periods of time during the day." So that if there are women who can and would like to perform such work, they have the option. And vice versa for some jobs which women might be traditionally considered for, ...like childcare. No reason a fella can't be just as nurturing and caring around children.

That said, my orginal point was that there are some jobs, few though they may be, that require one sex over the other. The example I gave of the rape or domestic violence centres could be one, where regardless of the excellent qualifications of a male counsellor, a woman will be preferred in that position. Men can be underwear models for men's underwear, and women might be charming modeling such articles from time to time, but for the most part, it's a male image that folks will screen for in hiring. Similarly, not many want to see Jack Black modeling ladies underwear for Victoria Secret.

There are some specific few jobs were the sex of the applicant is a prerequisite. I just think that most jobs don't need to reference gender roles to hire.

[toddzilla]

38. agreed

i never said that sex should be considered, my point was more of a physical limitation issue.


that being said, i couldn't imagine going to a male therapist, or a female urologist etc... just for comfort's sake.

[Habibi]

29. Or mammography techs!

[Frangible]

7. Yeah baby, yeah!

Seriously though... not for most everything.

But here's a question-- how far do you extend equality?

Should women in the military have to pass the same physical fitness standards as men?

Should women have to register for the draft?

Should gender be a non-factor?

Personally, my opinion is this-- gender should be ignored. Only the individual's person ability should be considered, unless gender is specifically required (actress playing a female character, etc).

However this would require in some cases more effort from women. The fact is, they are genetically weaker than men in terms of muscle mass, and for some jobs their physical development would require more effort than a male.

I'm all for treating people equally-- but what do women think?

[kalashnikov]

9. how could you let women in the military

who couldnt pass the fitness test? Thats not equality and it would be extremely dangerous.

[Frangible]

17. Right now women have different standards in the military than men

And cannot serve in some combat roles.

[kalashnikov]

27. then they arent really standards.

A standard is a standard and I dont think it should be amended for certain groups.

[northzax]

31. there is a different standard

for 'combat' positions. Of course, as the experience of the 507th motor company in Iraq taught us, the only non-combat positions are those on another continent.

[kalashnikov]

37. The problem is the standard is "no women"

I think that gender should be a non-issue in determinig the standards throughout the army. If you only have to lift 20 lbs in a supporting position than that should be the standard, not less for women and more for men.

[Character Assassin]

8. For porns stars, sure.

I mean, what does one do with a porn star that refuses to have sex?

[lynndew2]

36. YES!!!

I was thinking this post might stop "LynnDew2 does Peru". Thanks for standing up for me!!! LOL kidding O8)

[GoddessOfGuinness]

11. Only if the job is

prostitute.

Sex makes all the difference in that gig.

[Nikia]

12. No, but it is to some extent

I was going to write a thread on ways of discriminating aginst women that aren't considered discrimination. Is it discrimination when you run an ad in the newspaper saying that the applicant must be able to lift 100 pounds (or another relatively heavy weight that most women cannot lift) when the job does not require lifting anywhere near that amount? Is it discrimination to assume that a female applicant probably cannot lift a certain amount or require her to have proof of regularly lifting that amount while not requiring a male applicant to do the same?
Another case I can think of is experience at a heavy lifting job being required for the better, higher paying non heavy lifting job. A friend of mine worked for a printing company that required press assistants to do a lot of heavy lifting. They did take on a few female temps to do the job but most quit within a few days. After a couple of years in the heavy lifting job, good assistants would be promoted to operator which paid almost twice as much and did not require heavy lifting.
Also, is it a form of discrimination to do nothing to stop sexual harassment in male dominated jobs or work areas if women quit soon after being subjected to this or are afraid to take the job for fear of being harassed.
These questions have some relevance to the factory I work at. The job postings for the heavier labor positions exaggerate the required lifting amount discouraging women and some women are afraid to take these jobs since they are dominated by men and harassment seems to be tolerated where I work.

[kalashnikov]

13. not unfair.

"Is it discrimination to assume that a female applicant probably cannot lift a certain amount or require her to have proof of regularly lifting that amount while not requiring a male applicant to do the same? "

That would not be an unfair request. The average male can lift far more than the average female.

[VelmaD]

16. Define "far more"

and then link to some proof.

I lug around heavy stuff all the time. I picked up my ex and carried him about 40 feet once and he weighed in at 230 pounds at the time. As with most things I think you're gonna find that the difference between individual men or individual women is greater than the difference between men as a group and women as a group.

[Frangible]

18. couldn't have said it better myself

"the difference between individual men or individual women is greater than the difference between men as a group and women as a group. "

Pretty much sums it up.

[kalashnikov]

28. the armys physical fitness standards are the proof

Women only have to do something like half of the pushups a man has to do. For entrance into the USAF academy men perform an average of 10 pullups, women dont even have to do pullups, they just have to hang from the bar for so many seconds, the average being aprox. 20 seconds.

[VelmaD]

42. you failed to address my point...

pushups and pullups are interesting and we could talk all day about ho wmuch more difficult they are for women because of our lower center of gravity...but I asked for proof that the average man could lift far more than the average woman

[northzax]

33. got it right here.

http://www.wonderquest.com/size-women-us.htm

According to the Department of Health and Human Services, the 'average American Woman' is 5'3" amd weighs 152 pounds. The 'average American Man' stands 5'9 and weighs 180 pounds. the 'average woman' has a Body Mass Index of 26.3, while the man has a BMI of 26.5 (note that both fall into the official category of 'overweight')

According to the CDC http://www.cdc.gov/nccdphp/dnpa/bmi/bmi-adult.htm "For example, women are more likely to have a higher percent of body fat than men for the same BMI." Therefore, since the BMI of both genders is within basically a rounding error, we can extrapolate that the average man is likely to have more muscle per kilo than the average woman. sinc the average man also has 15 more kilos of weight, it is obivous that he has more muscle overall. Ergo, he can lift more.


Perhaps the average american woman simply isn't training as hard as the average man. so let's go look at some top flight weightlifters, shall we? people who lift things for a living, indeed a vocation. maybe the Olympic records? Certianly women can lift as much as men, per kilo, there, right? er. no. according to the International Olympic Committee (http://www.olympic.org/uk/utilities/reports/level2_uk.asp?HEAD2=8&HEAD1=5) the records for weightlifting aren't even close. So let's take a look at the numbers (men: http://multimedia.olympic.org/pdf/en_report_62.pdf Women: http://multimedia.olympic.org/pdf/en_report_63.pdf) in the 75+ Kilo snatch, the women's Olympic record is 135 Kilos, or 1.8 Kilo/kilo-bodyweight. (assuming the woman is the lightest allowed for the competition, 75Kilos) The men's 77 Kilo Snatch, open to all men under 77 Kilos is 173 Kilos. Or 2.24 Kilos/Kilo-bodymass. that's 33% more per kilo than the woman. THe numbers bear out across the records. I won't bore you by repeating the numbers for the other records, you can do the math yourself, I'm sure.

This is by no means intended to disparage any woman, most of whom can kick my ass to next thursday. simply to provide you the proof you asked for. I'd say 33% qualifies as 'far more', wouldn't you? I humbly await your response.

[VelmaD]

41. One problem with your stats...

how long have women been training at and competing in weightlifting? I know the answer to that. Women's weightlifting was added to the Olympics in 2000. That's not a very long time to even begin to try to start to catch up to the guys.

Comparing the strongest women to the strongest men also does not adress my original point. That the difference between the genders is less than the difference among each gender seperately. Can you lift as much as the women's world record holder in your weight class? I doubt it. But you're much farther from the record holder for your own gender than you are from me. (Which isn't really a fair comparison because I go to the gym at least 4 times a week but we'll pretend I'm average.)

I'm not saying that women will ever catch up to men at some things - like weightlifting. But this thread isn't about weightlifters. It's about what the normal person - male or female can do. It's about the assumption that gets made about men that they can do certain things just because they are men and about women that they can't do them just because they're female.

[alarimer]

32. I saw an ad like that

In this case it was a position working at a marine lab on research vessels. I am not sure if they were trying to discourage anyone from applying but it required being able to life 200 lb trawl doors. It gave me pause until I realized (knowing a little bit about trawling) that the doors were most likely raised and lowered using winches and all a person would have to do was maneuver them around. You wouldn't actually be liftimg the doors at all. So that would appear to be doable for anyone in reasonably good shape who was reasobly strong. I didn't apply for the job because I have one that pays more. But maybe I should have just to see the interview process.

[Deja Q]

19. Hey! Some people still ask this question at interviews:

"Have you been or are you now a practicing homosexual?"

(If it'll get me the job, I am!!!)

The bias on the part of people against women is absurd. Though, in construction, the women would have to live with men hooting and hollering at them all day...

[Nikia]

20. Is that a form of discrimination?

A boss that may not want women working with the crew might allow or even encourage male employees to harass a woman. I think that is a form of discrimination.

[Deja Q]

22. It's human nature

Though males have somewhat improved over the last hundred thousand years or so, we're still quite infantile...

And it is discrimination. And vulgar of the men to do that.

[toddzilla]

23. when i worked at UPS..

we had a thing called "iron" where you drove this bigass cart around and dropped off all the really heavy crap to individual docks. i saw more than a few women working the iron cart during my brief stay there. what really pissed me off was that when i was a loader, the supervisor would always have me do the iron for the dock because i'm a big muscular type guy. being union we weren't supposed to lift anything more than 75lbs ( i think) by ourselves, but he'd always just say "work on the iron" when there wasn't anyone to help me.


i'm rambling..

[onebigbadwulf]

24. Certain jobs require certain genders

That's a given.


However, in cases where women generally have a disadvantage, fire fighting, piano moving, etc... hiring should be done like blind studies.

The people who perform best get hired. Personally, I'd rather have a strong woman carrying me out of a burning house than poindexter who has to drag me.

And I would rather have a strong man carrying me out than a woman who has to drag me.

[Demonaut]

26. As for firefighters

A woman needs to be at least strong enough to pull someone as heavy as Rush Limbaugh (at his peak) out from a burning house.

[jmowreader]

39. Most women would leave Rush Limbaugh in the burning house

..

[Guaranteed]

35. Well if I don't want to have sex with someone, why would I hire them? nt