Feeding trolls

[J.A. Terranson]

On Mon, 20 Jan 2014, James A. Donald wrote:

> In an effort to manufacture a poster girl, Hultgreen was required to attempt
> to land on an aircraft carrier, and in due course, killed herself,
> demonstrating why every naval pilot is male.

Actually, Revlon was merely a shitty pilot. Her orginal callsign was 
"Hulk", because she had almost superhuman strength and endurance (she 
belonged in a combat position with the Army, not the Air Force - she'd 
have been a perfect Infantrywoman).  She earned the "Revlon" moniker for 
applying heavy makeup prior to a USAF interview which was, ironically, 
touting her as the first woman to be rated for combat air missions.  Her 
crappy flying skills do demonstrate that *all* women are incapable of 
flying in combat, it proves only that *she* was incapable of flying (in or 
out of a) combat mission,


> You can affirmative action women to all sorts of jobs, and furtively have a
> white male do the actual job, but the reason all naval pilots are males is
> that when you affirmative action someone to naval pilot and expect them to
> land on a carrier, they die.   

Agreed - when you A/A anyone into such a position where they are unsafe 
and unqualified, they die. It has nothing to do with gender, it has to do 
with being capable of doing the job (flying, shooting at others in the 
bushes in front of you, whatever).

> There is room in an office for males to do the actual work, but there is 
> no room in a warplane for a second pilot to do the actual piloting.

This is a non-sensical statement because it is sitting on a broken 
foundation.  It defies the basic laws of the universe to make such an 
assumption (since it is not evidence based, it is actually just mere 
speculation).
 
> You can put girls in the army, and all that immediately happens is that the
> march slows down,

Bullshit.  The NYPD Academy started admitting women (ok, girls when they 
are just 18) in 1980 IIRC: the NYPD Academy *was* (it changed several 
years later after a *male* complained (and sued too I think) that it was 
"hazing" new recruits by treating them as hard in school has they would be 
tested on the streets of New York.  A court agreed, and *bam*, the 
"abusive" behaviour stopped. Personally, I didnt think it was abusive, I 
thought it was absolutely necessary to screen applicants who couldn't cut 
it in the real world.  Plenty of women graduated from "abusive" Academy 
classes in the intervening years, and many went on to be decent cops.  
Some went on to be dripping bags of tears too: just like the "men".

> They tested her, in testing she repeated made errors that would have 
> killed her.

Precisely.  She was not *qualified* to do the work for which they wanted 
positive publicity - she was unqualified because she was a shitty pilot, 
not because she was female.

> She was the best female pilot available, so they had her do 
> real landings regardless, so that they could have a poster girl.

Yes.  They should have waited for a more competent female pilot, and 
placed her in a position for which she was more qualified.  Maybe for the 
#2 seat???
 
> Amelia Earhart was initially given a ticker tape parade and a meeting with the
> president for being flown across the Atlantic like a sack of potatoes by a
> male pilot, but the cognitive dissonance being too great, such a poster girl
> attracting ridicule, they eventually had Amelia Earhart and Kara Hultgreen
> attempt to perform difficult piloting tasks for real, killing them.

"they" didnt have Earhardt do anything: she wanted to go, and she was 
likely fully qualified.  A lot of strangeness surrounded her loss, most of 
this strangeness appears to suggest she had a partial radio failure which 
stopped her ground support team from contacting her to bring her in in low 
visibility weather (no radars then, at lt least, not for planes.

> In due course we will have female naval pilots with same uniforms as male
> pilots.  The unisex uniforms will be made girly.

Really?  I suspect the flight suits will remain as they are: built for the 
requirements of the pilot in the environment of a specific aircraft.  Why 
would they make the flight suits "girly"?  That makes no sense.

> The traditions will be made girlie or abolished. 

Oh My GAWD!!!!  Nooooo.... Say it aint so!  <barf>  This is conjectural 
bullshit, and you are smart enough that you *should* know it*!

> Male camraderie will be forbidden. 

Depending on the definition of "male comraderie", maybe so.  Maybe it 
*needs* to change anyway?

> References to nuts and bolts will be forbidden as excessively sexist.

Conjecture.  Now, if your problem is that you feel intimidated talking 
about your dick in front of a femal compatriot, that an issue for you and 
the air force headshinker.  
 
> But the female naval pilots will not actually be required to fly carrier 
> planes.

Nobody is *required* to fly carrier planes today!  They don't want pilots 
who don't *want* [very badly] to fly carrier based craft, as these people 
will inevitibly fuck up at some point, killing the pilot, plane, and 
possibly others as well.  You have to volunteer *before* you can attempt 
to get rated for carrier based aviation.

Get a grip man!

//Alif

-- 
Those who make peaceful change impossible,
make violent revolution inevitable.

An American Spring is coming:
   one way or another.