The Cellar - The Gender Equality Checkpoint

The Cellar (http://cellar.org/index.php)

- Politics (http://cellar.org/forumdisplay.php?f=5)

- - The Gender Equality Checkpoint (http://cellar.org/showthread.php?t=30908)

Quote:

U.S. Air Marshal Left Loaded Gun in an Airplane Bathroom

WASHINGTON — A federal air marshal on a flight earlier this month from England to New York left her loaded service weapon in the aircraft’s bathroom where a passenger found it, four marshals familiar with the incident said.

The passenger gave the weapon to a member of the flight crew, who returned it to the air marshal. But the marshal, who is based in the New York region, failed to report the incident to her superiors, as required by agency policy, until several days later. The incident happened on April 6, aboard a Delta flight from Manchester to Kennedy International Airport.

Despite the security lapse, the marshal was assigned to a flight a few days later, people familiar with the case said. ...

Gee, I wonder how she managed to keep her job. :eyebrow:

Question on Quora...
What will it take to close the gender wage gap?

Todd Miller, former Marine Corps jet pilot
Written Mar 14

Stop hiring women
Don’t allow women to take company offered time off
Force women to upgrade to higher paying positions as soon as they become available

Here’s the explanation of how women Airline Pilots are paid less and why, despite the pay scales being gender neutral.
Wages measured are average aggregate wages by gender.
Since women are entering the workforce at the highest rate in history, they are entering at the bottom of most company pay rates. Which pay the least. So they drag down the average aggregate pay.
This is especially true with Airline Pilots.

So how can Airline pilots, who are solely paid based on type of airplane flown, and position (i.e. Captain or FO), pay women less?
Well for starters, an airline like Skywest, a regional feeder airline pays less than an airline like United, a global airline.
Regional airlines fly Regional Jets. Major airlines fly 777s.
If airlines (and other businesses) completely stopped hiring women, they would only be hiring men.
Those men would be hired at the lowest payrate. Which means that those men being hired would be paid less than all women currently working there.
Since pilots entering the workforce do so at regionals, they are paid less than experienced pilots at major airlines.
In time, the gender pay rates would be the same, until women would start being paid more because only men are being hired, so the lowest paid employees would be only men.

Also, when employees want to take time off, you’d have to restrict that choice for women.
Right now at airlines, female pilots voluntarily take three times as much time off as male pilots do.
In a recent company offering of monthly leaves of absence by a major airline, roughly 20% of all leaves requested were by women, despite women only representing 6% of that airlines pilots force.

Additionally, women pilots are far less likely to voluntarily upgrade to a higher paid position, but choose to stay in a lower paying position to have better seniority.
A recent analysis showed that in narrowbody and widebody First Officer positions at a major airline, 15% of those positions were held by women who could bid Captain, but chose to stay in those seats for the benefits of controlling their schedule. In many bases the #1 First Officers were women. Despite being only 6% of the pilot force. Those women could choose to upgrade to Captain at any time, but have chosen to forego the higher pay of that position for the benefits of better schedules, better vacation selection, and ensuring they could have weekends off, while their male counterparts overwhelmingly chose to upgrade, flying weekends, and getting paid more money.
If we removed the choice of women to take time off, and forced them to upgrade, the gender wage gap would disappear.

"forced them to upgrade"

See, this is why funding sports for girls is a waste, they can't even follow the simple rules of T-ball.

http://cellar.org/2017/sign-her-up.gif

:lol2:

She hits like a girl

Here's a problem for men. Most agree that NO means NO. From her point of view it's NO, but from his point of view it's ON. What we have is failure to communicate. Think about that before you give sworn testimony.:eyebrow:

Oh, it's on, alright.

Like a pot o' neck bones.

In the US, women's right to vote was rescinded by each state between 1777 and 1807, starting with NY and ending with NJ.
In 1838 KY said, female heads of household in rural areas could vote in elections deciding taxes and local boards.
In 1848 women started having conventions, getting organized and stirring up shit in every state. They chilled during the Civil War.
In 1867 Kansas voted No on women and/or Black Males voting. In 1869 WY Territory voted yes for women.

That got them really fired up and switched from pleading to confrontational tactics.
The 1870 15th amendment says no barring for race, color, or previous condition of servitude, but still allowed for sex.
1870 Utah said Yes, but 1872 Dakota Territory says No by one vote. 1874, MI No, 1875 MI and MN Yes for school board elections

In 1880 NY grants school suffrage to women. 1883 Washington territory says Yes.
1887 women in Utah and Washington Territory lose it, but win Yes in municipal elections in Kansas, But No in RI.
1890 No in SD, Yes in WY and 1893 CO says Yes. 1896 Utah and Idaho Yes, but CA No, and 1902 NH No.
1910 WA state and 1911 CA vote Yes.
All during this time there have been several National leaders and organizations which came and went, merged and split, infighting and arrests, plus anti-suffrage organizations campaigning in some states.
So by the time this picture was taken women were split between the pretty frustrated, and didn't give a shit.
Teddy Roosevelt's third party had put suffrage as a plank in their platform.

Long slow road, ladies.

Quote:

First women enlist to join Navy special operations teams

Two women have become the first females to enlist as candidates to join the Navy's special operations teams, CNN reported Saturday. ...

... Only men were previously allowed to serve in combat roles in the U.S. military. But the positions were opened up to women in January 2016.

But since then, no females have applied to join special operations forces, CNN reported. Eight classes of SEALS and seven SWCC class have graduated since March 2016. All of them have been made up entirely of men.

[BOLD MINE]

Ha!

They typically want candidates who already have at least one term of service under their belts, those well oriented to the military, for placement in spec ops units. They waiver the time in service requirement and make it an enlistment option when they have to fill quotas. That usually happens when they're critically short on spec ops personnel. They seem; however, to be graduating full classes ... except they're all men.

Makes me wonder if they're taking people right off the street for spec ops training, hoping to snag some females, just to be politically correct. There's a reason women already in the military aren't volunteering to be trained for those assignments. It'll be interesting to see if this plays out as anything more than a dog and pony show.

Probably because women aren't mean enough. :haha: :lol: :lol2: :lol2: :lol2: :lol2: :lol2: :lol2:

Women Parliamentarians of Iran in front of the gate of the Iranian Parliament , mid 1970s. Thank Allah that threat is gone.

Why is it always the pretty ones that shoot me down? ;)
OK, I misspelled fighter, exciting women do that to me, so shoot me.. wait no, don't shoot.

Ah yes, the Oklahoma Highway Patrol...