Author Topic: The night witches  (Read 4718 times)

Offline Tigeress

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1260
The night witches
« Reply #120 on: October 22, 2007, 07:22:24 AM »
Quote
Originally posted by Mark Luper
Thanks!

You have mail :)

Mark


You do too :)

TIGERESS

Offline Tigeress

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1260
The night witches
« Reply #121 on: October 22, 2007, 07:48:03 AM »
Quote: Originally posted by Rolex
I don't agree with this at all and I think you're missing the greatest hurdle for women aspiring to be combat pilots. It's the same hurdle that exists in some other professions. Women are generally poor at 3 dimensional thinking. That is why there are so few women mechanical and civil engineers. Only exceptional women can process in 3 dimensions. Once things are transformed to 2 dimensional representations, they are better able to visualize and transform, but intuitive, rapid 3-dimensional thinking is something not many women are wired to do.

Not just any Tom, Dick or Harry, Martha, Jane, or Mary qualifies to fly combat fighter jets.

Only exceptional men and women are allowed to fly combat, so I don't see a problem there, as far as exceptionality goes...

mmmm... Then you better alert the US Air Force right away about the three dimentional drawback!

They already have 49 female fighter pilots.

Two of which are USAF Thunderbirds.

I can find their phone number if you wish. Their wingmen are in great danger according to your assertion!

You should, based on your assertion, notify the US Air Force immediately that women can't think in three dimensions.

:)

TIGERESS
« Last Edit: October 22, 2007, 08:19:51 AM by Tigeress »

Offline lazs2

  • Radioactive Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 24886
The night witches
« Reply #122 on: October 22, 2007, 08:18:58 AM »
Oh booohooo  "we women are really superior it is just that men keep us down.. if we had a chance we would rule the world.."

Yeah... just like communism is really the best system.. they just haven't done it right yet.

and yes... I know that we are much the same in the womb..  then there is a radical change.. the change continues.

Take sclotzie/viking boys example of steroid girl for instance...  sure.. she is strong...all humans can increase their strength with drugs and hormones.  male hormones...

Is she the strongest human in the world?   in the top 100?  can she compete with other men who are body builders?  of course not.. she is just some freak of a woman..  stronger than the average person but able to compete in what she does... only with other women... just like fighters...

maybe in schlotzie/viking boy world all is civilized but.. the truth is that it is not the world.. not even his.. his country is helpless and living at the good graces of stronger nations... his civilization could be over run in a heartbeat... A new soviet union could have it's way with his country and there is nothing they could do.

riots.. shortages.. disease.. power struggles..this is the way of the world now as it has always been.. people have not changed.. the phony and thin venner that is some civilized nations has collapsed before in an instant and will again.

sure.. as schlotzie points out... there are freak women who can compete with other women if they dedicate their life to it and do the right drugs but... they can't compete against men.  

There are some freak women who could beat a wussy man in the ring but.. they average man can beat the most exceptional woman..

Anywhere that women are allowed to compete on an EQUAL basis in the physical... they lose.    A whole lot of men are always better.

viking boy didn't really answer my question... if a woman hits a man it is out of frustration.. that does not give him reason to hit back.. I would say to him that it is not so much that the men are aholes and causing it as.. the women often cause the problem.. he has not seen American women in action... filthy mouthed drunks with no respect for men or women are all over the place... I would not beat one up tho.   Of course I could... I don't need to prove it and can take the puny blows they throw.. I don't care if it is the steroid girl he shows.. no fear from any woman.   An average man beats an exceptional woman... that does not spell equal.

lazs

Offline Rolex

  • AH Training Corps
  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3285
The night witches
« Reply #123 on: October 22, 2007, 08:23:42 AM »
You can't be serious. That makes no sense and you know it.

Here, let me quote something you said above and see if it fits with what I wrote:

"I am the only female engineer in my company and it is an engineering company."

Oops... :)

Offline lazs2

  • Radioactive Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 24886
The night witches
« Reply #124 on: October 22, 2007, 08:41:26 AM »
yep.. it all boils down too.. so long as you have plenty of men to choose from... why bother with the women?  

I deal with plenty of engineering firms and there are a few women but.. all are run by men.   All the important presentations and decisions are made by men... sure.. to look good.. they push a skirt out there in the group hug picture...

What country is using women for fighter pilots?   how many planes have they shot down?   we just shot down a bunch lately.. how many of the shooters were women?

I don't want women in combat... I don't want to worry about em... war is bad enough..  I will fight em if I have to but don't want to do that either.. only desperate or immoral countries allow their women to fight.

police and fire.. the taxpayer is being cheated having women in those roles... or.. weak men.. we would not have the weak men tho if we had not lowered the standard to let women in... women have ruined the fire and police... it has cost us money and lives.

putting women in harms way is immoral.


lazs

Offline Toad

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 18415
The night witches
« Reply #125 on: October 22, 2007, 09:22:11 AM »
Quote
Originally posted by Tigeress
I concede your point...

Let me rephrase it... "Women have shown to the US Air Force the potential to be as good or better than men fighting in actual arial combat... Given the opportunity, I believe we will prove this to be so."

In the case of the F-22 we are talking potential vs results... inanimate or living, the issue is the same. Potential vs Results

TIGERESS


Potential. That is the key; as yet it is unproven potential.

In the actual event, I think we can all safely expect that the bell curve will once again rule, just like it does with men pilots. Some men and women will be  below average pilots, including fighter pilots. Most will be adequate and average. A some will be very, very good and a tiny number will be OMG exceptional.

I do not believe that women will dispropotionately occupy the very top slots. I do not believe they will win a disproportionate share of the Distinguished Graduate awards at Top Gun/Red Flag or any other school. I expect them to be competitive and win their share but I don't believe, despite your various links, that they will sweep all competitors into the dustbin.

There's one other little factor too; robotics/computers.

Multitasking? There isn't going to be a human that can compete with a multi-tasking, properly programmed computer in the near future. Those will take the sensor data and compute all the possible opponent moves and best possible counter in nanoseconds. Consider how far the chess computers have come versus man. A few more generations of computer development and it will be no contest in the air, either.

Greater G limits? Again, humans can't compete even now. The aircraft can pull far, far more G's than the puny little human in the seat. Couple that with good computers and sensors and there's a huge change coming.

Yeah, there will still be human flown combat aircraft but I suspect that before to very long the inanimate killing machines will be the most feared winged predators in the sky.
If ye love wealth better than liberty, the tranquility of servitude than the animated contest of freedom, go from us in peace. We ask not your counsels or arms. Crouch down and lick the hands which feed you. May your chains sit lightly upon you, and may posterity forget that you were our countrymen!

Offline Tigeress

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1260
The night witches
« Reply #126 on: October 22, 2007, 09:28:08 AM »
Hi Viking,

I, for one, concede that abundant testosterone and suppressed estrogen does imbue any human, male or female, with muscle mass and a larger skeleton and a testosterone-induced aggressive and dominating behavior starting at the onset of puberty than a human, male or female, not so imbued.

The medical evidence speaks for itself.

Does physical strength alone make one inferior/superior relative to the other one?

...Depends on the bias of a given individual's assertion on that one basis, imho. But that doesn't mean it is true.

Some would argue that female is superior because of our ability to produce new humans. On that basis, we are superior.

I think gene splicing will even eliminate the need for male produced sperm, thus eliminate the need for the existence of males altogether, thereby making males obsolete and optionally non-existent thus irrelevant to the survival of the human species.

But I, for one, would not want to live in a world without males... nor bypass natural human reproduction methods but it is a very possible scenario.

TIGERESS
« Last Edit: October 22, 2007, 09:53:43 AM by Tigeress »

Offline Tigeress

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1260
The night witches
« Reply #127 on: October 22, 2007, 10:03:17 AM »
Quote
Originally posted by Tigeress

At least one female USAF Pilot apparently has combat flight experience that I have found so far... Lieutenant Colonel Martha McSally, USAF

Martha McSally is a pilot in the U.S. Air Force. She was the first American woman to fly in combat since the lifting of the 1991 prohibition of women in combat. McSally is also the first woman to command an American fighter squadron, the 354th Fighter Squadron based at Davis-Monthan Air Force Base. McSally is an A-10 Thunderbolt II pilot.

McSally graduated from St. Mary Academy - Bay View and then the United States Air Force Academy in 1988. She earned a Master's degree from Harvard University's John F. Kennedy School of Government. She was selected for fighter pilot school in 1993, and was deployed to Kuwait in January 1995. During that deployment, she flew combat patrol over Iraq enforcing the no-fly zone. In July, 2004, she took command of the A-10 equipped 354th, and was subsequently deployed to Afghanistan, where she deployed weapons in combat for the first time. In 2005 McSally and her squadron were awarded the David C. Shilling Award, given by the Air Force Association for the best aerospace contribution to national defense.

McSally was represented by the Rutherford Institute in her successful lawsuit against the Department of Defense, challenging the military policy that required servicewomen stationed in Saudi Arabia to wear the body-covering abaya when traveling in the country.



TIGERESS


This is what Martha drives to work and what she used in actual combat sortes in Afghanistan and Iraq fighting the Taliban and Al Qaeda.

Very cool video, by the way!!! http://www.metacafe.com/watch/403875/a_10_thunderbolt/

TIGERESS
« Last Edit: October 22, 2007, 10:34:49 AM by Tigeress »

Offline Tigeress

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1260
The night witches
« Reply #128 on: October 22, 2007, 10:25:00 AM »
Quote
Originally posted by Toad
Potential. That is the key; as yet it is unproven potential.

In the actual event, I think we can all safely expect that the bell curve will once again rule, just like it does with men pilots. Some men and women will be  below average pilots, including fighter pilots. Most will be adequate and average. A some will be very, very good and a tiny number will be OMG exceptional.

I do not believe that women will dispropotionately occupy the very top slots. I do not believe they will win a disproportionate share of the Distinguished Graduate awards at Top Gun/Red Flag or any other school. I expect them to be competitive and win their share but I don't believe, despite your various links, that they will sweep all competitors into the dustbin.

There's one other little factor too; robotics/computers.

Multitasking? There isn't going to be a human that can compete with a multi-tasking, properly programmed computer in the near future. Those will take the sensor data and compute all the possible opponent moves and best possible counter in nanoseconds. Consider how far the chess computers have come versus man. A few more generations of computer development and it will be no contest in the air, either.

Greater G limits? Again, humans can't compete even now. The aircraft can pull far, far more G's than the puny little human in the seat. Couple that with good computers and sensors and there's a huge change coming.

Yeah, there will still be human flown combat aircraft but I suspect that before to very long the inanimate killing machines will be the most feared winged predators in the sky.


Toad,

Thank you for helping me to refine the message to a more succinct, accurate, and finer granulated statement. That is what team-work is all about.

Men and women are partners and teammates... not adversaries.

I love you guys...

Best Regards,

TIGERESS
« Last Edit: October 22, 2007, 10:27:11 AM by Tigeress »

Offline Tigeress

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1260
The night witches
« Reply #129 on: October 22, 2007, 10:54:14 AM »
Quote
Originally posted by Rolex
You can't be serious. That makes no sense and you know it.

Here, let me quote something you said above and see if it fits with what I wrote:

"I am the only female engineer in my company and it is an engineering company."

Oops... :)


Why are females at a disadvantage breaking into a cerebral vocation which is presently male dominated?

Engineers are schooled and hired by males more so than by females because of historic and present male repression and suppression of females.

Stronger-willed and more determined females get through that male gauntlet in spite of the obstacles tossed in their way by biased males.

...Same with female combat pilots.

Think it has anything to do with aggression and dominance vs. naturally  passive  natures, intellect aside?

Face it... many men are simply biased enough to ignore strength of intellect on the part of females.

Go figure! :)

I have often pondered the male preference for male. Seems a bit MO'ish to me.

The men I work with, by and large, have gotten past such biases.
I am the one who turned thumbs down on the last female engineer interviewing for a job. Upon interviewing her I found she didn't have the right qualifications for the work we do.

I prefer to work, co-ed, with collegues. Working in a female prevalant vocation would be boring, among other things. :)

TIGERESS
« Last Edit: October 22, 2007, 11:18:24 AM by Tigeress »

Offline Toad

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 18415
The night witches
« Reply #130 on: October 22, 2007, 12:44:57 PM »
Quote
Originally posted by Tigeress

Stronger-willed and more determined females get through that male gauntlet in spite of the obstacles tossed in their way by biased males.

...Same with female combat pilots.


TIGERESS


Can't speak for the way things are now. I do remember that when the first 5 females made it through pilot training they were given special treatment. That treatment didn't make the course harder, either. So I don't know if you could have said obstacles were placed in their way; I think the opposite was true.
If ye love wealth better than liberty, the tranquility of servitude than the animated contest of freedom, go from us in peace. We ask not your counsels or arms. Crouch down and lick the hands which feed you. May your chains sit lightly upon you, and may posterity forget that you were our countrymen!

Offline Tigeress

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1260
The night witches
« Reply #131 on: October 22, 2007, 01:55:04 PM »
Quote
Originally posted by Toad
Can't speak for the way things are now. I do remember that when the first 5 females made it through pilot training they were given special treatment. That treatment didn't make the course harder, either. So I don't know if you could have said obstacles were placed in their way; I think the opposite was true.


Hi Toad,

Women were denied permission to fly in combat until 1991.
That was a serious obstacle.

Yes, often when a minority is given a pathway to an undiscovered country such as women flying combat, special allowances are made to easy the way initially.

This is often viewed as unfair. Things tend to settle out over the long run, all things being equal. Women flying combat was still met with biased resentment and slow acceptance on part of the male pilots. Their collective attitudes are reported to have changed quite a bit since 1991  ...to the good.

Same thing happened when blacks were finally allowed combat roles and finally allowed to vote unopposed by racial bias.

Women flying in combat presently, no doubt, earn the right to be there based on their ability to get the job done as do blacks of either gender.

For women with potential and interest in engineering, the obstacles start in grade school and continue due to society's gender bias.

Male and females are different thus society plays a very large role in enabling/disabling on a gender basis.

Good thing about society is its fluidity. It takes a little coaxing and a lot of time to change, but it does change slowly ...As we can all see with women flying in combat roles today... and also women in engineering in an increasing way.

Some male attitudes here in Aces High is evidence that gender bias is alive and well though not universal among all men.

For example, Tour 91, last month, a male pilot callsign Zack(etc) discovered I was flying due to convos on channel 200. He asked me if I was female to which I said yes. His next msg was to the effect: "Then I am going to un-sub. I don't want to fly with females.”

I laughed and asked him if he was gay just to tease him. The guys got a laugh out of his responses on ch:200.

I am accustomed to attitudes like that and don't take it personally nor seriously. I wanted to go send to him to the tower just so I might see his reaction to  "SYSTEM: TIGERESS shot you down". hahahaha

(I shot down over 160 planes last month (my first tour); most if not all were males.)

But I didn't bother to find Zack. I was busy having fun, instead.

Some people will never change their biases.
Many, however, overcome their bias ...over time.

Society is slow, yet fluid, in that regard ...like thick molasses.

TIGERESS
« Last Edit: October 22, 2007, 03:12:43 PM by Tigeress »

Offline lazs2

  • Radioactive Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 24886
The night witches
« Reply #132 on: October 22, 2007, 02:15:53 PM »
Yeah.. just like "special allowances were made initially" for women to get into fire and police jobs.

the result is that we have lower standards of strength and size that have resulted in sub standard workers who are cheating the tax payer.  

lowering standards is one way for women to compete... if there is no standards or they are low enough... everyone can compete.

lazs

Offline Tigeress

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1260
The night witches
« Reply #133 on: October 22, 2007, 02:31:30 PM »
Quote
Originally posted by lazs2
Yeah.. just like "special allowances were made initially" for women to get into fire and police jobs.

the result is that we have lower standards of strength and size that have resulted in sub standard workers who are cheating the tax payer.  

lowering standards is one way for women to compete... if there is no standards or they are low enough... everyone can compete.

lazs


Lazs,

You have gender bias. Everyone here knows it.
You are entitled to you opinions, as is everyone.

God Bless you,

TIGERESS

Offline lazs2

  • Radioactive Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 24886
The night witches
« Reply #134 on: October 22, 2007, 02:41:38 PM »
If by "gender bias" you mean that I think men and women are different then...

yes... I do.

lazs