Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I don't think too many independent women are referred to like that. That was one poster who did that.
Independnet women are usually appluded for it. It is expected of men and anything less is failure. Take a look at the thread about househusbands for proof.
Again, "I'm independent" wouldn't even dawn on me. I am putting my dh through school, so I primarily financially support out family. He would do the exact same thing for me. I do what I must for my family. Gender has nothing to do with it. And if some have a negative comment about my dh's financial contributions, well, it's none of their business.
I like it when women are independent and self-supporting.
Trouble is, I don't have much use for Feminists. Just in my own experience many of them are hypocrites!!!!! They whine about how women are still treated as 2nd-class citizens, which they're not. Then after their rants about equality and fairness they still expect men to hold open doors and pay for dates.
They seem to talk the talk but they don't often walk the walk!!!!!!
No worries, I'm dealing in reality and HERE bushfire is a REALITY.
Also in reality physical strength and endurance are not the only qualities that matter when fighting fire, (least not here) something the governing bodies of the firefighting services have taken into consideration.
So by all means you should advise your firefighting (and coast guard services) you have your own set of requirements with regard to who you will accept help from in an emergency. I do not and am perfectly happy with the training and efforts of our firefighters, both men and women (and children) who have qualified as per the requirements and standards set here.
Bearing in mind also that FIRE itself doesn't care about the physical strength and endurance or the gender or age of the firefighter.
Had you read any of the links I provided you will see that of the people who died in our recent bushfires there were also included in the numbers qualified firemen who had met physical strength and endurance requirements, whilst women and children and old men and the not so strong and fit, and even UNQUALIFIED, survived. You might descriminate, fire does not. It doesn't care. It will take what it wants indescriminately.
You might find the efforts of an 11 year old lacking if your benchmark for being a successful firefighter is strength and endurance. There were many children (not even firefighters but citizens) who fought along side their families in the recent fires. Some of them died. If you find their efforts lacking I find that offensive.
Back to reality again we do not live in a country where it is prudent for ANYONE who is able bodied to sit back and say, "I cannot fight because I don't match strength and endurance benchmarks set by those who believe firefighting is a man only domain". Most people here recognize that fire affects us ALL and to that end everyone is encouraged to learn and have a plan.
You're right, we will take what we can get when there's a bushfire because anybody sitting around crying in their cornflakes that they don't fit requirements is a burden, just as are those with a false sense of security that their strength and endurance will save them. Had you read the article I posted you'd know that the MFB is also changing its requirements and conducting a recruitment drive for a wide variety of candidates simply because it now has an ageing fighting force who might not even qualify under the previous requirements. So it's down to a choice. An arbitrary set of requirements that can only be filled by a select group who are NOT applying and qualifying for whatever reason OR accepting that we need firefighters and that many different people of differing abilities, ages and genders can and do have a contribution to make.
Hi moonshadow,
All you did was repeat the same thing again. You are pretty much arguing once again that an 11 year old is as good as any. I am too sensible to believe that nonsense. You are right, fire does not discriminate and neither does anything dumber than a box of rocks.
Quote:
That's great, I'm happy for you. You clearly are a superior human being. It must have made you feel so special to prove your manliness in such a way. I am more than certain that your girlfriend has been suitably put in her place.
I needed to listen to her speculations that she was superior to me. That wouldn't bother you would it? If she had proven her dominance , that would not bother you either but she would get a "you go girl". That does not seem to elicit any response from you. Only when I expressed any superiority, did it upset you. When I don't play dead to placate this kind of feminist, they cry like little girls. With the things I do well, I am almost always superior to women. My condolences for the demise of your flat earth paradigm. As it turns out, I was happy to dump her. I learned to avoid this kind of women and did my part to dry up the flotsam on the beach.
In light of Officer Munley saving so many lives at Ft. Hood. Feminism means to me this brave woman had the equal opportunity to serve in the military, join a civilian police department and become a SWAT TEAM member. This is what feminism has always been about. I'm busting my buttons with pride.......
Again, "I'm independent" wouldn't even dawn on me. I am putting my dh through school, so I primarily financially support out family. He would do the exact same thing for me. I do what I must for my family. Gender has nothing to do with it. And if some have a negative comment about my dh's financial contributions, well, it's none of their business.
Hi Braunwyn,
And once again I must besmirch your reputation by pointing out your pragmatic superiority. I am sorry to be such an embarrassing baboon in your corner.
This is a great point. Huh, you actually changed someone's mind on the internet. Normally, I wouldn't agree that women should be allowed to take on roles if they cannot meet the same requirements as their male counter parts (fire fighters, police, infantry, etc) . But, in reality, all situations are not the same and to approach them as if they are could potentially be harmful.
Thanks.
As it turns out the Fire Service here agrees with me because in that link I posted earlier they address the points I brought up and are shaping their organization with that in mind.
All you did was repeat the same thing again. You are pretty much arguing once again that an 11 year old is as good as any. I am too sensible to believe that nonsense. You are right, fire does not discriminate and neither does anything dumber than a box of rocks.
I needed to listen to her speculations that she was superior to me. That wouldn't bother you would it? If she had proven her dominance , that would not bother you either but she would get a "you go girl". That does not seem to elicit any response from you. Only when I expressed any superiority, did it upset you. When I don't play dead to placate this kind of feminist, they cry like little girls. With the things I do well, I am almost always superior to women. My condolences for the demise of your flat earth paradigm. As it turns out, I was happy to dump her. I learned to avoid this kind of women and did my part to dry up the flotsam on the beach.
It is with great regret I must inform you that the terms of service of this site prohibit me from saying exactly what I think.
In light of Officer Munley saving so many lives at Ft. Hood. Feminism means to me this brave woman had the equal opportunity to serve in the military, join a civilian police department and become a SWAT TEAM member. This is what feminism has always been about. I'm busting my buttons with pride.......
"Have no fear of any man, no matter what his size. When danger threatens call on me, and I will equalize." Colt
What cities have more men in them? Please tell me.
Any city with good employment prospects attracts, men disproportionately to fill these jobs. As a result, such places usually have a high ratio of single men to single women. Among bigger cities, think about the places where the oil industry is located, since that sector has been prosperous recently. The ratio for age 30 to 35 is worst for men. However, in these larger places, the ratio is seldom much beyond 1.7 to 1 in any particular age group. Since these places have a large stable married population, the OVERALL ratios are far lower, when the married are included, since men and women offset each other 1:1. And every wedding makes the ratio worse for men.
If you want ratios of 10 or twenty to 1, go to the boom towns where the resources are extracted. However, these men may not be your type!
1. I like dudes.
2. I want to stay clear away from rabid feminists. Which are less likely in male dominated cities.
Not true.
Women are less likely to be strongly feminist in their outlook, where there is a shortage of men. Being too strident in such places will quickly kill any chance they have. The only hard core feminists in these areas are marginalized and easily ignored.
Where there is a surplus of men, its "kiss my a$$" and the women all gravitate towards the most extreme positions. Men are only considered for their wallet.
I've regularly shocked here by their very open and extremely offensive characterizations of men. They expect (and usually get) it all and men can either suck it up or go their own way. Some women appear to try to make amends, as they approach age 50, but its all an act!
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.