Don't understand the dislike for Turnabout Intruder
-
rcocean3 — 9 years ago(October 21, 2016 05:05 PM)
I must have missed that. Thanks.
Still puzzled as to why Vulcan philosophy means crazy, unqualified chicks can be Starship Captains.
Of course, given the numbers of crazy MALE Starship captains, why not some female ones?
Seems like every other planet has some rogue male Starship commander who went crazy and thought Nazism or whatever was a good idea. -
grizzledgeezer — 9 years ago(October 21, 2016 07:55 PM)
Still puzzled as to why Vulcan philosophy means crazy, unqualified chicks can be Starship Captains.
You seem to be going out of your way to miss the point. I'll spell it out:
One need not be a raging feminist to wonder why, circa 2100, there are no female starship captains. -
kerryedavis — 9 years ago(October 21, 2016 08:42 PM)
But why assume they're just sexist or whatever? That's what leftists do NOW. So if 50% of weightlifting champions aren't female, they insist it must be institutional sexism or whatever. If they're advanced in so many other ways in the future, why not believe that maybe they found a reason?
-
grizzledgeezer — 9 years ago(October 22, 2016 06:27 AM)
Well, I'm a leftist, and I don't believe that.
If there were weightlifting competitions for women as well as men, then 50% of the champions would be women. They just wouldn't be competing with men, for very obvious reasons.
Shall we waste time arguing the obvious that men and women are different, that some of those differences are biological, others have been imposed on women? Why are you so insistent on believing that women might be inherently incapable of management and command?
In an "ideal" society, people would be able to progress as far as they desired and were capable of progressing not held back, or being forced into a career they had no interest in, "just to prove a point". -
chris109 — 9 years ago(October 22, 2016 06:47 AM)
Hey grizzled, you do know that if you vote for Hillary, Madonna will give you a bj.
https://www.rt.com/usa/363357-madonna-offers-fellatio-clinton-voters/ -
rcocean3 — 9 years ago(October 22, 2016 12:21 PM)
One need not be a raging feminist to wonder why, circa 2100, there are no female starship captains.
No, why should there have been Female Starship Captains? Presumably, it would be a highly sought after, prestigious "Combat" position requiring physical and mental courage, outstanding leadership ability, tip-top physical conditioning, and a high verbal and mathematical IQ. There's no reason to believe out 50 or so Star Ship captains any of them would be female, any more than the Top 50 Army Combat Generals are female.
How many Women today command a nuclear Sub or an Aircraft Carrier? And how many of those are affirmative action babies because we're not expecting a Naval war anytime soon?
Of course, in 1969 we were in a shooting war and everyone over that age 35 had lived through WW2 and/or Korea, and the whole idea of female Captain of a large combat vessel, like Halsey or Nimitz, would've been laughable. -
kerryedavis — 9 years ago(October 22, 2016 02:58 PM)
These days, which I guess grizzledgeezer doesn't understand - and which would make him insufficiently leftist to those who decide such things now - the fact that half of the commanders aren't female, is ipso facto, prima facie evidence of sexism.
He also doesn't seem to gather that his own example is nonsense. If you have X number of weightlifters, why should 50% of the champions be female even if 50% of the overall contestants aren't? That's an even more "special" type of lowering standards, dumbing down the competition, quota system, etc. Which leads to another problem: a lot of more-qualified people - i.e., men - stop even bothering to compete if they know that half of the "winners" will be less-qualified because the system is rigged. -
rcocean3 — 9 years ago(October 22, 2016 04:31 PM)
Good points. It also ignores the factor of motivation. Men and Women are different (Duh).
If you went to say 100 randomly selected 18 year old men and asked them if they'd want to be a fighter pilot or the Captain of a Submarine, I'm sure a lot of them would say yes, and some of them would crawl over broken glass to be one.
If you asked 100 randomly selected 18 Year old women, the number saying "yes" would be much, much, less, and I doubt many would "crawl over broken glass" to be be one. They'd probably be more interested in being a CEO, a lawyer, or maybe even a Politician. -
grizzledgeezer — 9 years ago(October 23, 2016 11:52 AM)
In an "ideal" society, people would be able to progress as far as they desired and were capable of progressing not held back, or being forced into a career they had no interest in, "just to prove a point".
You also deliberately ignored what I said (above). -
kerryedavis — 9 years ago(October 24, 2016 07:10 PM)
That depends. Should you - or anyone else, for that matter - be allowed to practice medicine just because you want to?
At any rate, I hope you realize (but you probably don't, and likely can't) that to the extent such things exist, and especially to any extent they might go too far, it actually comes from liberalism, not conservatism. -
grizzledgeezer — 9 years ago(October 24, 2016 07:39 PM)
Kerry, you deliberately distorting what I write. So I'll have to spell it out.
Obviously
, wanting to do something, no matter how strong the desire, does not make you capable of it. Almost all jobs, at any level of skill, have minimum performance standards.