The United Colonies of Earth wrote:Camicon wrote:I never contested that physical ability is important in military combat roles. I contested your assertion that such requirements were lowered for women who want to serve on the front lines. That has never been the case in the USA. By the way, your source fails to mention a single woman that was killed by an enemy combatant in open conflict. Of all the causes of death mentioned, not a single one involved shooting at and being shot by an enemy combatant.
The judicial system, like everything else in society, suffers from a systemic discriminatory bias against women and minorities, in almost all cases. And while you are correct that the percentages of men and women completing post-secondary education has changed dramatically, what should be of note is that the workforce does not reflect this dynamic.
You seem to be confusing the term "physically fit" with "fit". The first refers to physical ability. The second refers to one's overall ability. Overall ability is what matters. The physically less-able firefighter may be a more able firefighter overall than their muscle-bound companion, due to that fact that firefighting involves far more than chopping down doors with axes, and hauling dead weight for fifty-some yards (also, we don't live in a meritocracy).
If you absorb news without critically examining it, regardless of the source, then your perceptions and opinions of many things (essentially everything) will be horribly distorted. MSNBC is as biased as FOX, though in a different way. Neither can be taken at face value (though MSNBC slightly moreso than FOX, who has had longer to hone their bullshit-fu). No, it isn't necessarily a left-right thing, but through the red-blue-and-white glasses that American media views the world, reality has a distinctly "left" bent to it.
Damn...MSNBC convinced me that Iraq War was fought for oil.
Well, it certainly wasn't fought for the reasons given by the Bush administration.