Female pilot accident rates

On 1 Nov 2004 06:04:58 -0800,
(NoPoliticsHere) wrote:

"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.

Actually, the Supreme Court has pretty much eliminated "quotas" and
variable standards for achieving affirmative action goals.

As for Capt. Boser's comments on "weak sister" pilots, I've
encountered the term quite often in the military (long before women
entered the community) and seen it applied to males in the squadron.

The important issue is to examine the entire class, not one or two
egregious examples. It has taken a long time in USAF/USN, but the
females in the Tacair community are currently well accepted and have
been proving themselves quite competent. (For a decrepit, old-school
dinosaur like myself to say that is a remarkable testimonial!)


Ed Rasimus
Fighter Pilot (USAF-Ret)
"When Thunder Rolled"
www.thunderchief.org

"NoPoliticsHere" wrote in message
om...
"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.'"

I don't disagree with the author's anecdotal observation, I disagree with
your now-admitted conclusion that this is proof that female pilots as a
class are less capable than male pilots. That's like saying "I know of a
situation where a student was admitted to a college when his SATs were below
minimum but his father was an alumnus contributor, therefore, students whose
parents are contributing alumni are, as a class, dumber than those whose
parents aren't contributing alumni.

You neatly sidestepped this statement in my previous post. You
also sidestepped my question on what Captain Boser meant by
a "weak sister" pilot.

It's a gender-specific application of the general term "weak pilot" which
was applied to male pilots long before there were noticeable numbers of
female pilots.

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.

" 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.

---------------------

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.

" 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.

---------------