Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site cmu-cs-edu1.ARPA
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!bonnie!akgua!mcnc!philabs!cmcl2!seismo!rochester!cmu-cs-pt!cmu-cs-edu1!rafferty
From: rafferty@cmu-cs-edu1.ARPA (Colin Rafferty)
Newsgroups: net.women
Subject: Re: Women in combat
Message-ID: <386@cmu-cs-edu1.ARPA>
Date: Wed, 26-Jun-85 22:35:01 EDT
Article-I.D.: cmu-cs-e.386
Posted: Wed Jun 26 22:35:01 1985
Date-Received: Sun, 30-Jun-85 01:40:31 EDT
Organization: Carnegie-Mellon University, CS/RI
Lines: 51

>> I'll challenge the bit about fire fighters.  In NYC just a few years back,
>> the fire department was forced to give women an "equivalent" physical test
>> for admittance.  This test was the exact same thing that the men had, except
>> every single part of it was easier (i.e. fewer reps, shorter distance,
>> lighter weights).  This was all because the test given was "geared toward
>> men", who could do more strenuous activities than the women.
> 
> I think the claim made by the women who sued to become fire fighters
> was that the tests for firefighters had parts which discriminated
> against women, and *which were not really relevant to firefighting
> ability* (i.e. doing pushups). The second point was the important
> one; it's my understanding that if the court had decided that these
> parts *were* relevant to firefighting ability, they would not have
> ordered the tests changed regardless of whether they discriminated
> against women. So the argument made was that these women were being
> discriminated against because of factors unrelated to their ability
> to do the job.

So why didn't the courts order the tests to be changed, and not simply have
different tests for women and men?  Seems that if the tests weren't fair,
they should just be changed so that they would reflect the firefighter's
ability.  If there are two separate tests, then we are going back to the
problem of hiring men and women separately.  That is no good.

>> I seem to remember that the general feeling by we male chauvanist pigs was
>> that any one of us would feel much better if he were in a fire and the fire
>> fighter coming to rescue him was male.  In fact this was part of a letter to
>> the editor in the Daily News (letter written by a female).
> 
> It depends on the individual. If I had a choice between the woman who
> picks Rodney Dangerfield up in the beer commercial and Woody Allen,
> I'd have to go with the woman.

I agree.  However, that is the whole point of the physical: what can the
person being tested do?  Can s/he carry a person out a window, down a
ladder.  I don't think that Woody Allen would be able to pass the qualifier,
even the women's.

I think that a person's ability to run with a 150 lb. dummy on his back has
a lot to do with being a firefighter.  (How much does a firehose weigh?)

> Isaac Dimitrovsky

The main problem that I was talking about is that the courts decided that
the men and women should have different tests.  That can never be
reasonable.  Never.

----
            Colin Rafferty { Math Department, Carnegie-Mellon University }

"I suspect that CMU would deny ever knowing me, let alone sharing my views."