Blah de blah…and it goes on. Then you have a couple of options - either ask the specific person you want, that you know is storng enough, rotating it round the class, or maybe ask the group of people that you know is strong enough.
Just a simple question - Your life depends on finding someone who can lift a 60kg (130lb) weight. You can choose from group A - 17 year old boys / men or group B 17 year old girls / women. Which group are you going to choose from?
I am very very against sexism. I can’t count the number of times that people tell me I treat my daughter “too much like a boy”. When hiring I don’t give a damn whether its a boy or girl. I get professional (as in no happy endings) massages reularly and don
't care whether from guy or girl. But I do think we should acknowledge that guys are stronger than girls. If I am hiring for a position where strength is important (and lets not go down the road of job redesign so strength is not important) I am going to look for a guy first - until and unless the girl prooves she can do it.
I have already related in this thread a story about working in an aluminium warehouse - what would you, as the HR manager have done in that same situation. I have also had another warehouse job that involved unloading 25kg bags of rice from a 40 foot container, stacking them up to 5ft high on a pallet. Absent specific information to the contrary, who is going to be able to handle such a job - guys or girls? (I would say maybe 80% of guys can, while maybe only 30% or less of girls can, based on personal experience)
You should ask your husband. He can help you make decisions.
If you had 20 applicants and expected only 11 of the 20 to be qualified, would you knowingly throw away 3 of those 11 job applications? What if your personal experience was such that 80% of whites were able to do something, but only 30% of blacks? In your opinion, would it be ok to interview only white applicants?
Actually no I wouldn’t. I would, you know - actually TALK to the people involved to ascertain their suitability. I most certainly wouldn’t do it based on race, sex or anything else. Because I know that the characteristics of a large group have very little to do with the abilities of a specific individual.
My mother was prone to referring to “the girls at work” even tho’ she and they were all well over 40. Just sayin’.
And unless you’re looking at a culture where women are, say, used to walking ten miles a day with a five-gallon water jar balanced on their heads, let’s figure most girls or women can’t toss around 56 pounds weights anything like as casually as men can.
Not very well. And only as a very temporary “ohshit” stopgap measure until you can get your hands on a pad/tampon, unless your flow is really, really light.
It was stupid to react by banning all bags instead of allowing bags regardless of gender (restricted to a certain size of bag if necessary).
News flash: people are selfish. What percentage of white people in America during segregation complained about Jim Crow laws?
I graduated high school in 2001, and my grade school didn’t allow shorts, either.
Uh, why would you need to specify the group at all? Why can’t you say, “I need a strong person to help me lift this” instead of “I need a strong boy to help me lift this”? Are the weaker people also somehow damaged in the brain that they can’t estimate how heavy the item is and whether or not they’ll be able to lift it? Why is the gender qualifier even necessary, unless you’re expecting the boys to somehow employ their penises or testicles in the carrying process (ouch)?
Yeah, and most people know this–if you asked for a “strong person” to help you lift something, odds are good that most of not all of your volunteers will be boys (either because they’re stronger, they’re trying to impress the girls, or both). But if there was a girl who wanted to do it and was strong enough, then why should she be automatically excluded just because of her gender?
Newsflash: That doesn’t mean that the only people capable of helping the person in question with their lifting are those who are XY instead of XX. The boys are **more likely **to be the strongest ones in the class, but that in no way excuses asking for only boys to come help carry something.
You cannot tell whether a **specific individual **would be more or less able to lift the item simply by their genitalia.
No, it doesn’t work “until you have a break.” It **maybe **keeps the blood off of your pants until you can walk back to where you have a pad or a tampon. I don’t know of any woman who would use toilet-paper as a stop-gap (no pun intended… maybe) and go back to what she was doing for a few hours.
My god, what are these teachers asking their students to move? IME it’s always been a few desks or maybe a table. Stuff either gender should be fine with (especially when puberty hasn’t hit most of the boys). Anything beyond that sounds a bit unsafe.
Very rare, but I’ve use them in a pinch. Contrary to what seems to be common with Doperwomen, not all of womankind passes a bucketful of blood and endometrium every month.
