The_Walrus wrote:
See, I can understand why people might think that quotas in business or law or medicine or any number of professions might be a good idea. But the fire brigade is an area where physical strength counts big time, and can very easily be measured. Generally men comfortably outperform women in strength (I'm often amazed how much stronger I am than my female friends, and I'm very weedy) so we should expect the fire service to be male dominated if strength is one of the main criteria for selection.
Of course, female firefighters might have advantages as well. They might be better at making decisions under pressure (and the sorts of temperatures encountered in a house fire are amongst the most pressure a human can come under). They could literally be better at keeping a cool head. They might, therefore, have a place in the brigade alongside male firefighters.
Yes, in the parts of firefighting that demands strength one should obviously hire women that qualify to a given, necessary level of it. You shouldn't stretch the good intentions too far, I agree. That would be stupid.
To daydreamer84: it depends if the end justifies the means. With the end meaning what I posted earlier. It is a popular opinion today that many professions are excluding, discriminating and biased toward women, which I would understand if women think is unjust. I know women have wanted more equailty this far, I don't know if they want to stop. I don't want to stop them, but the process have to be rational and intelligent.