![]() |
If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
"John Mazor" wrote in message ...
Actually, the term fits this situation, thanks for pointing it out. So I take it you disagree with Captain Boser when he states: "I see the EEOC decrees to be the biggest threat against pilot competency today, not because there aren't competent minority/female pilots out there to be hired, but because quotas are imposed and airlines sometimes have to lower their normal standards to achieve those mandated numbers. If they don't, the EEOC sues them, costing them many millions of dollars and it will result in the imposition of even harsher mandates in the future to 'remedy their past discrimination.'" You neatly sidestepped this statement in my previous post. You also sidestepped my question on what Captain Boser meant by a "weak sister" pilot. -------------------------- |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
NoPoliticsHere wrote:
It was just my OBSERVATION that in numerous newsworthy crashes in the recent past, a woman has been in the cockpit. When I also combine my observation with the FACT of the gender/race-based quota system in this country, can't you see how easy it is to connect dots? Probably not I'm sure. ------------------- I am not a fan of quota systems of any kind- I think they ultimately do a disservice to those they purport to help. What you have done here is begun with a supposition (women are hired on the basis of political correctness and not competence) and then worked backwards in order support that supposition. That is the worst sort of analysis possible. Furthermore, you attempted to present this faulty argument in a forum that deals with a subject you admittedly know nothing about. If you wish to be taken seriously- here or in life- you must think things through objectively. You have, it would appear, failed to do so. |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
" wrote in message roups.com...
NoPoliticsHere wrote: It was just my OBSERVATION that in numerous newsworthy crashes in the recent past, a woman has been in the cockpit. When I also combine my observation with the FACT of the gender/race-based quota system in this country, can't you see how easy it is to connect dots? Probably not I'm sure. ------------------- I am not a fan of quota systems of any kind- I think they ultimately do a disservice to those they purport to help. Agreed. What you have done here is begun with a supposition (women are hired on the basis of political correctness and not competence) and then worked backwards in order support that supposition. No, what I have done is claim that ***SOME*** women and minorities are hired when their gender and/or race takes on more importance than their competence. It is hard to believe that you *still* miss my point. That is the worst sort of analysis possible. Furthermore, you attempted to present this faulty argument in a forum that deals with a subject you admittedly know nothing about. If you wish to be taken seriously- here or in life- you must think things through objectively. You have, it would appear, failed to do so. And perhaps you could improve your reading comprehension. --------------------- |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
![]() NoPoliticsHere wrote: What you have done here is begun with a supposition (women are hired on the basis of political correctness and not competence) and then worked backwards in order support that supposition. No, what I have done is claim that ***SOME*** women and minorities are hired when their gender and/or race takes on more importance than their competence. It is hard to believe that you *still* miss my point. Claim=supposition. Shall I drag out Webster's? And perhaps you could improve your reading comprehension. See above. And don't bother with law school- you'd never pass the LSAT. |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
" wrote in message roups.com...
NoPoliticsHere wrote: No, what I have done is claim that ***SOME*** women and minorities are hired when their gender and/or race takes on more importance than their competence. It is hard to believe that you *still* miss my point. Claim=supposition. Shall I drag out Webster's? And perhaps you could improve your reading comprehension. See above. And don't bother with law school- you'd never pass the LSAT. Thanks, your clueless responses have done more to back up my claims about incompetent women than I could've done with any one or two posts. --------------- |
|
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
AOPA Stall/Spin Study -- Stowell's Review (8,000 words) | Rich Stowell | Aerobatics | 28 | January 2nd 09 02:26 PM |
Who's At Fault in UAV/Part91 MAC? | Larry Dighera | Piloting | 72 | April 30th 04 11:28 PM |
USAF = US Amphetamine Fools | RT | Military Aviation | 104 | September 25th 03 03:17 PM |
Effect of Light Sport on General Aviation | Gilan | Home Built | 17 | September 24th 03 06:11 AM |